Court of Appeals of New York.
IN RE: SUFFOLK REGIONAL OFF-TRACK BETTING CORPORATION, Appellant-Respondent, v. NEW YORK STATE RACING AND WAGERING BOARD et al., Respondents-Appellants. (And Four Other Related Proceedings.).
Decided: December 17, 2008
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Victor Paladino, Barbara D. Underwood and Andrea Oser of counsel), for New York State Racing and Wagering Board, respondent-appellant. Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP, White Plains (Frederick J. Martin, Susan E. Galvo and Robert D. Meade of counsel), for Yonkers Racing Corporation, respondent-appellant. Nolan & Heller, LLP, Albany (Richard L. Burstein of counsel), for Saratoga Harness Racing, Inc., respondent-appellant. Marvin Newberg, Monticello, for Monticello Raceway Management, Inc., respondent-appellant. Jaspan Schlesinger Hoffman, LLP, Garden City (Thomas J. Garry and Keith M. Corbett of counsel), for Nassau Regional Off-Track Betting Corporation, appellant-respondent. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Susan Choi-Hausman, Pamela Seider Dolgow, Ira H. Block and June R. Buch of counsel), for New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation, appellant-respondent. Powers & Santola, LLP, Albany (Michael J. Hutter of counsel), Neil H. Tiger, Hauppauge, and Stern & Rindner, Goshen (Mark D. Stern of counsel), for Suffolk Regional Off-Track Betting Corporation and others, appellants-respondents.
OPINION OF THE COURT
At the core of this litigation-with the Off-Track Betting Corporations (OTBs) on one side, and the State Racing and Wagering Board and state harness racing tracks on the other side-are questions of statutory interpretation. We begin with a brief history of the relevant sections of the Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law and the present controversy.
Prior to 1970, New York permitted wagering on horse racing only at its thoroughbred and harness tracks, leaving (as Supreme Court observed) “a lucrative and illegal niche for local b
No comments:
Post a Comment