Pletcher Dodges NY Bute Finding But Faces New Hearing

A New York appellate court has thrown out a two-week suspension of Hall of Fame trainer Todd Pletcher, but the case is probably far from over. The basis of the legal case occurred when Pletcher was found responsible by the New York State Gaming Commission for an overage of phenylbutazone, also known as "bute," In the race horse Capensis after it finished sixth in a race at Saratoga Race Course held in July 2022. The NYSGC still had oversight of medication policies and testing at the time. The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority now regulates medication and testing. A postrace blood sample tested at the New York State Drug Testing and Research Program showed a concentration of 1.56 micrograms per milliliter in plasma. A split sample analyzed at the Kenneth L. Maddy Equine Analytical Chemistry Laboratory in California confirmed the presence of bute at 1.8 mcg/ml. The legal threshold in New York at the time was 0.3 mcg/ml. A state steward notified Pletcher of a 14-day suspension and a $2,000 fine, which was affirmed by a hearing officer and, ultimately, the NYSGC. Pletcher appealed, and the case found its way to the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, which issued a unanimous ruling setting aside the violation and ordering a new hearing. Primarily at issue was the fact that the only evidence against Pletcher consisted of two reports from the respective labs, neither of which was supported by testimony from anyone who could vouch for the accuracy of the findings or the reliability and general acceptance of the tests in the scientific community. Instead, the letters were introduced into evidence through the hearsay testimony of NYSGC equine medical director Scott Palmer. The appellate court opinion notes an objection to those matters was not preserved; in other words the objection was not raised until after the suspension order was entered, at which time Pletcher hired attorney Andrew J. Mollica. While noting hearsay evidence can be sufficient to support an administrative order under New York Law, the appellate court voiced concern about the fairness of the proceeding. "Although we find that a direct challenge to the scientific methodology of the testing is unpreserved, the admission and reliance on those letters raises concerns regarding the fundamental fairness of the hearing, which underpins the substance of petitioner's appeal," wrote the court. "To be sure, in most instances, 'hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination and, if sufficiently probative, it alone may constitute substantial evidence.' "However a court reviewing the substantiality of the evidence upon which an administrative agency has acted exercises a genuine judicial function and does not confirm a determination simply because it was made by such an agency. The question is whether such proof is sufficiently relevant and probative so as to constitute substantial evidence on its own." According to the opinion, the New York laboratory "did not provide the method of testing, and although the method of testing was provided in the letter from the California laboratory, neither letter gave any indication as to the reliability or general acceptance of the tests utilized to ascertain the presence and concentration of bute in the postrace samples." The court thus found the imposition of a rule violation by the NYSGC was rendered in a "fundamentally unfair" manner. At this point Pletcher faces the challenge of the lab findings in another hearing at which the state of New York will get a second bite at the apple should it choose to pursue the matter.