Florida court finds damages not payable as greyhounds are free to race elsewhere not banned
Over four years have lapsed since Florida's electorate sanctioned the prohibition of greyhound racing wagering within the state, but a recent court decision has found damages are not payable as greyhounds are free to race in other states, just not within Florida.
A recent appellate court decision on Wednesday denied the contention of a Pinellas County kennel, asserting it was due remuneration as a result of a ‘property seizure'.
The ruling was upheld by a trio of judges from the 1st District Court of Appeal.
The decision affirmed the verdict of a Leon County circuit judge, who previously declared that D'Arcy Kennel, LLC, and its proprietor, Christopher D'Arcy, were ineligible for monetary damages following the passage of the 2018 Amendment 13, as per the electorate's mandate.
The Wednesday ruling emphasised the extensively regulated nature of the gambling industry, concluding that D'Arcy could not have reasonably anticipated that his investment in dog racing would be immune to considerable regulatory impact.
The decision quoted a legal precedent, stating that rational investment-backed expectations are considerably diminished within heavily regulated fields, such as parimutual gambling.
Consequently, it was deemed unreasonable for D'Arcy to anticipate the absence of future governmental interference with his property investments.
The constitutional amendment of 2018 mandated the closure of Florida's longstanding greyhound industry by December 31, 2020.
In response to this, D'Arcy filed a lawsuit against the state in August 2019, seeking damages for the depreciated value of property, inclusive of racing dogs, which, according to the lawsuit, could previously command prices of up to $50,000.
The litigation alleged a per se taking, stating, “Through Amendment 13, the state of Florida has imposed such a substantial burden on the private property rights of plaintiffs (D'Arcy and the kennel) that it equates to a per se taking that completely deprives plaintiffs of all economically beneficial use of the property”.
The lawsuit further equated the adoption of Amendment 13 to a physical taking wherein the state of Florida has effectively dispossessed the plaintiffs from their domain and any profit derived from their property.
However, Leon County Circuit Judge Angela Dempsey refuted the kennel's claims in 2021, asserting that the ballot measure only barred greyhound owners from utilising the dogs to race at Florida tracks where wagering was conducted.
She outlined that plaintiffs retained virtually every right related to their property – they were still permitted to race, sell, and keep their dogs as pets, and even participate in wagered races in other states where greyhound racing was legal.
The only restriction imposed was racing them in a wagered race in Florida, a restriction not severe enough to constitute a ‘taking'.
Echoing the sentiments of the circuit court, the appeals court decision, delivered by Judges Joseph Lewis, Ross Bilbrey, and Susan Kelsey, stated that the enactment of Amendment 13 did not deprive racing dog owners.
The appeal decision, while not ideal for the claimant, is an important one for greyhound racing in the United States (US) as it undermines anti-greyhound racing claims that greyhound racing is banned in Florida.
The appeal court's decision clearly reiterates that only racing greyhounds in races where wagering is conducted is banned in Florida.
Greyhound breeding, ownership, rearing and training are still clearly legal pursuits in Florida.
As is the case in many other states in the US, greyhound racing is not banned as claimed by anti-racing groups such as Grey2K, it is simply not conducted or wagering on greyhound racing is not legislated.
As then American Greyhound Council Chairman, Ian Garland, correctly observed in 2017, “Grey2K is famous for misrepresenting the facts in order to sell its political agenda.”
A tactic similarly used by anti-racing zealots in Australia and New Zealand, especially during the brief NSW greyhound ban.
Simulcast, off-track betting and online advance-deposit wagering of live greyhound racing elsewhere remains legal in Florida.
Live greyhound racing is still legal and thriving in West Virginia.
Live greyhound racing remains legal, though not currently practiced in the US states of Arkansas, Alabama, Texas, Kansas, Iowa, Wisconsin and Connecticut.
Simulcast, off-track greyhound betting, race and sportsbook betting, and online advance-deposit wagering of live greyhound racing from elsewhere remains legal in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.