Pval/legal question

#1 08-31-2006, 09:18 PM

Pval has an interesting legal fight that will occur. His agent Tom Knust said that hes still in the hospital. Fermin has asked Attorney General for an opinion of if hes violated his terms.
Heres the question. Guy went into the hospital where he is protected by dr/client privilege. When he comes out they cant ask him why he was there. he can say he had back surgery. They can test him and he will be clean. How do they prove he was ever on anything? If they say he violated terms then they have a Supreme Court case on their hands and he can sue. they have no right to go in the hospital and take a sample. This is gonna be very inetersting.

2MinsToPost · #2 08-31-2006, 09:20 PM

did he admit himself or was he admitted?

#3 08-31-2006, 09:39 PM

He admitted himself. He is not a ward of the state. He may ride again yet. What can they do? If his Dr said you cannot see my patient then they have no grounds to say he violated terms. That board can set all the rules they want, but none of em are gonna supercede the Constitution and the rights hes provided as a US citizen. When he gets out there is no way he wont test clean. So what happens then?

paisjpq · #4 08-31-2006, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

He admitted himself. He is not a ward of the state. He may ride again yet. What can they do? If his Dr said you cannot see my patient then they have no grounds to say he violated terms. That board can set all the rules they want, but none of em are gonna supercede the Constitution and the rights hes provided as a US citizen. When he gets out there is no way he wont test clean. So what happens then?

you are right ...i don't think they can really touch him. BUT that doesn't mean that they won't make his life a living hell harrassing him

jpops757 · #5 08-31-2006, 09:49 PM

Just another example of no consideration of right and wrong.

#6 08-31-2006, 10:16 PM

Oh bull**** Pops, hes a jockey not a brain surgeon!!! Shoot, I'd love to test the board members of the CHRB and see what we came up with!!! I'd lay 1-9 that if you tested those people you'd get a postive as well, what do you think? Differnce is that noone is bullying them.
Hes a rider, and hes got an illness. But maybe one of you geniuses could explain to me why that should affect whether he could ride or not as long as he shows up clean to work.
In the rest of the USA if you are a guy with a drug problem, everyone encourages you to work. Whats the differnce if hes bagging groceries or riding a horse? Hes still just a guy with a problem.
Wanna know what this is all about? Those mopes on that phony board wont ever make 6 figs and it kills em that he makes a bundle when he rides!!

GenuineRisk · #7 08-31-2006, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

He admitted himself. He is not a ward of the state. He may ride again yet. What can they do? If his Dr said you cannot see my patient then they have no grounds to say he violated terms. That board can set all the rules they want, but none of em are gonna supercede the Constitution and the rights hes provided as a US citizen. When he gets out there is no way he wont test clean. So what happens then?

Actually, they might be able to get access to his medical records, thanks to the HIPAA regs and the oh-so-lovely Patriot Act. Here's a link on it; it's kind of scary reading:

http://www.aclu.org/privacy/medical/...s20030530.html

Essentially, if the Attorney General suspects he might have violated the law by using drugs (not prove it, just suspect him of it) the authorities have the legal right to look at his records without a warrant. Great, huh?

jpops757 · #8 09-01-2006, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

Oh bull**** Pops, hes a jockey not a brain surgeon!!! Shoot, I'd love to test the board members of the CHRB and see what we came up with!!! I'd lay 1-9 that if you tested those people you'd get a postive as well, what do you think? Differnce is that noone is bullying them.
Hes a rider, and hes got an illness. But maybe one of you geniuses could explain to me why that should affect whether he could ride or not as long as he shows up clean to work.
In the rest of the USA if you are a guy with a drug problem, everyone encourages you to work. Whats the differnce if hes bagging groceries or riding a horse? Hes still just a guy with a problem.
Wanna know what this is all about? Those mopes on that phony board wont ever make 6 figs and it kills em that he makes a bundle when he rides!!

He backed his self intonthis situation by signing the contract because of his inability to play by the rules.

Gander · #9 09-01-2006, 07:52 AM

This whole P Val soap opera has gotten very old. Hes a great jockey and seems to be a great guy but this is like watching the Wedding Singer over and over and over on cable. Its getting really boring.

SentToStud · #10 09-01-2006, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

Pval has an interesting legal fight that will occur. His agent Tom Knust said that hes still in the hospital. Fermin has asked Attorney General for an opinion of if hes violated his terms.
Heres the question. Guy went into the hospital where he is protected by dr/client privilege. When he comes out they cant ask him why he was there. he can say he had back surgery. They can test him and he will be clean. How do they prove he was ever on anything? If they say he violated terms then they have a Supreme Court case on their hands and he can sue. they have no right to go in the hospital and take a sample. This is gonna be very inetersting.

It is interesting. The issues will be P Val's status as an "independent contractor" and not an "employee" and how HIPAA guidelines and requirements, especially those with respect to "Private
Health Information" (PHI) apply to his relationship with the State of California and the various racetracks by which he is compensated.

The Courts have generally held that HIPAA and it's PHI regs DO apply to the independent contractor class (earnings reported as 1099's), but not as stringently as to the employee class (W-2 folks). So that is an issue and while it could go through the State court system, it's likely to be resolved in federal court. So, that's one issue.

The second issue is whether whatever P Val agred to "give up" in terms of his right to privacy in return for his reinstatement(s) is reasonable and valid. While it's generally reasonable to allow people to make agreements when "consideration" is given by both parties, Federal Courts are likely to question whether the bargaining away of HIPAA PHI privacy rights is in the public interest. This is the other issue.

It's interesting.

jpops757 · #11 09-01-2006, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SentToStud

It is interesting. The issues will be P Val's status as an "independent contractor" and not an "employee" and how HIPAA guidelines and requirements, especially those with respect to "Private
Health Information" (PHI) apply to his relationship with the State of California and the various racetracks by which he is compensated.

The Courts have generally held that HIPAA and it's PHI regs DO apply to the independent contractor class (earnings reported as 1099's), but not as stringently as to the employee class (W-2 folks). So that is an issue and while it could go through the State court system, it's likely to be resolved in federal court. So, that's one issue.

The second issue is whether whatever P Val agred to "give up" in terms of his right to privacy in return for his reinstatement(s) is reasonable and valid. While it's generally reasonable to allow people to make agreements when "consideration" is given by both parties, Federal Courts are likely to question whether the bargaining away of HIPAA PHI privacy rights is in the public interest. This is the other issue.

It's interesting.

You have got to be wrong. You are actually applying some common sense to a legal issue. How unusual.

Rupert Pupkin · #12 09-01-2006, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

He admitted himself. He is not a ward of the state. He may ride again yet. What can they do? If his Dr said you cannot see my patient then they have no grounds to say he violated terms. That board can set all the rules they want, but none of em are gonna supercede the Constitution and the rights hes provided as a US citizen. When he gets out there is no way he wont test clean. So what happens then?

I'm not sure if any of those legal issues apply here. If this was a criminal case, those issues would apply but this is not a criminal case. This is a license issue and the CHRB is responsible for granting licenses. I think they have a lot of leeway in deciding who they choose to license. If they revoke his license, he can try to get it overturned in the courts but I think the courts give a governing body like the CHRB a lot of discretion in deciding who gets licensed. If it went to court, the CHRB could show that P Val has violated the drug laws many times in the past and it may be irrelevant whether he violated it this time.

Danzig · #13 09-01-2006, 11:42 AM

i bet he doesn't lose the license. chrb is a paper tiger. the horsemen will want him back. some of the jocks may not, but they don't carry much weight.

Rupert Pupkin · #14 09-01-2006, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Actually, they might be able to get access to his medical records, thanks to the HIPAA regs and the oh-so-lovely Patriot Act. Here's a link on it; it's kind of scary reading:

http://www.aclu.org/privacy/medical/...s20030530.html

Essentially, if the Attorney General suspects he might have violated the law by using drugs (not prove it, just suspect him of it) the authorities have the legal right to look at his records without a warrant. Great, huh?

Yeah, I guess you're right. I guess people better not check themselves into drug treatment centers. Due to the Patriot Act, the government will get a list of people in drug treatment centers and have them arrested for drug use. LOL. Thanks for the heads-up on that.

SentToStud · #15 09-01-2006, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Yeah, I guess you're right. I guess people better not check themselves into drug treatment centers. Due to the Patriot Act, the government will get a list of people in drug treatment centers and have them arrested for drug use. LOL. Thanks for the heads-up on that.

I believe proof of drug use is not a crime. Possession, yes. Past use, I do not believe so.

Right or wrong on this?

my miss storm cat · #16 09-01-2006, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

Oh bull**** Pops, hes a jockey not a brain surgeon!!! Shoot, I'd love to test the board members of the CHRB and see what we came up with!!! I'd lay 1-9 that if you tested those people you'd get a postive as well, what do you think? Differnce is that noone is bullying them.
Hes a rider, and hes got an illness. But maybe one of you geniuses could explain to me why that should affect whether he could ride or not as long as he shows up clean to work.
In the rest of the USA if you are a guy with a drug problem, everyone encourages you to work. Whats the differnce if hes bagging groceries or riding a horse? Hes still just a guy with a problem.
Wanna know what this is all about? Those mopes on that phony board wont ever make 6 figs and it kills em that he makes a bundle when he rides!!

I love this post. I think I'll frame it.

Best of luck to Patrick.....

my miss storm cat · #17 09-01-2006, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I believe proof of drug use is not a crime. Possession, yes. Past use, I do not believe so.

Right or wrong on this?

..... and this one too.

Rupert Pupkin · #18 09-01-2006, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oracle80

Oh bull**** Pops, hes a jockey not a brain surgeon!!! Shoot, I'd love to test the board members of the CHRB and see what we came up with!!! I'd lay 1-9 that if you tested those people you'd get a postive as well, what do you think? Differnce is that noone is bullying them.
Hes a rider, and hes got an illness. But maybe one of you geniuses could explain to me why that should affect whether he could ride or not as long as he shows up clean to work.
In the rest of the USA if you are a guy with a drug problem, everyone encourages you to work. Whats the differnce if hes bagging groceries or riding a horse? Hes still just a guy with a problem.
Wanna know what this is all about? Those mopes on that phony board wont ever make 6 figs and it kills em that he makes a bundle when he rides!!

Most of the people on the CHRB are multi-millionaires so you are wrong about them not making 6 figs a year. Rick Shapiro was the President and CEO of Western Harness Racing. His family owned the harness meet that was at Hollywwod Park back in the 1980s. I know the whole family. they owned Native Diver. They are extremely wealthy. John Harris is a huge horse owner and breeder. He is a multi-millionaire.