Aroney

Aroney v. California Horse Racing Board

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 3d 928·193 Cal. Rptr. 708·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 2031
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 1983Civ. 66712California1,605 words

Opinion

Opinion

Compton, J.

Appeal from the denial of a petition for administrative mandamus (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5), which petition sought to compel the California Horse Racing Board (Board) to vacate its order barring petitioner, Theodore Aroney, from entering or wagering at the Hollywood Park Race Track (Hollywood).

Petitioner, after being excluded by Hollywood, sought and obtained a hearing before the board pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 19573, which provides in part as follows:. “Any person who, pursuant to a rule of the board, is excluded or ejected from any inclosure where horse racing is authorized may apply to the board for a hearing on the question of whether the rule is applicable to him. . . . [f] If the board determines that the exclusion or ejection was proper, it shall make and enter in its minutes an order to that effect. Such.order shall be subject to review by any court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with law.”

After the hearing the Board, on January 22, 1982, issued its order that petitioner was an excludable person. Petitioner then filed his petition for mandate on May 20, 1982, some 120 days later. The trial court sustained, without leave to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.