Supreme Court of Florida

Provisions of agreements which purport to restrict a Florida thoroughbred track receiving and conducting wagering on out-of-state thoroughbred simulcast signals, from either disseminating those signals to other Florida pari-mutuel venues or from contracting with those other venues to allow intertrack wagering on those simulcast signals, violate the requirements of Florida's Wagering Act. Further, provisions in Florida's Wagering Act, which dictate that restrictive provisions in such agreements are impermissible, are not preempted by the federal Interstate Horseracing Act.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/21/2006
• Published 09/21/2006

Judges

• LEWIS, C.J.

Court

• Supreme Court of Florida

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Keith E. Rounsaville of Akerman Senterfitt, Orlando, FL, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee Gulfstream Park Racing Association, Inc., James M. Landis and Jon P. Tasso of Foley & Lardner LLP, Tampa, FL, for Appellees Jacksonville Greyhound Racing, Inc., Florida Jai-Alai, Inc., and Investment Corporation of Palm Beach., Harold F.X. Purnell of Rutledge, Ecenia, Purnell & Hoffman, P.A., Tallahassee, FL, for Appellees Daytona Beach Kennel Club, Inc., Sports Palace, Inc., Hartman-Tyner, Inc., West Flagler Associates, Ltd., Southwest Florida Enterprises, Inc., St. Petersburg Kennel Club, Inc. and Associated Outdoor Clubs, Inc., Sanford-Orlando Kennel Club, Inc., Washington County Kennel Club, Inc., and Sarasota Kennel Club, Inc., David T. Knight, Marie A. Borland and Lara J. Tibbals of Hill Ward & Henderson, P.A., Tampa, FL, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant Tampa Bay Downs, Inc.