Fired Veterinarian's Lawsuit Against Hawthorne Dismissed
A federal lawsuit filed by former Hawthorne veterinarian Dr. Christine Tuma has been dismissed by a U.S. District Court judge, reports the Daily Racing Form.According to the Daily Racing Form, Judge Jeffery Cummings of the Northern District of Illinois ruled that Tuma's claims in the suit did not establish direct harm or qualify for adjudication under the broad anti-conspiracy law known as RICO. The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice, which allows Tuma to re-file the suit without alleging harm.
In the lawsuit, Tuma alleged that Hawthorne allowed horses to race, despite her diagnoses that they were unfit to do so. She also alleged that the track fired her after reporting the overturned diagnoses to the federal Horseracing Safety and Integrity Authority.The defendants listed in the lawsuit were: Hawthorne Race Course; the Illinois Racing Board; Jim Miller, Hawthorne director of racing; and state chief veterinarian Dawn Folker-Calderon.Read more at drf.com.
This story was originally reported by Paulick Report on Jul 30, 2025, where it first appeared.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
6 hours ago
- Politico
Federal judges decry political attacks from the White House
Since returning to the Oval Office in January, President Donald Trump has trained his ire on judges seen as stymieing his political agenda. He and allies lashed out against the likes of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who had blocked the administration's efforts to swiftly deport Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador. Threats against federal judges skyrocketed in the weeks after Trump reentered office. The administration's barbs have continued, now over six months into the president's second term. On Monday, Attorney General Pam Bondi announced her office had filed a misconduct complaint against Boasberg, the chief judge on the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. 'The fix is so easy in some ways,' said Salas. 'What we need is our political leaders from the top down to stop fanning these flames. To stop using irresponsible rhetoric. To stop referring to judges as corrupt and biased and monsters that hate America.' Conservative jurists have also faced high-profile threats in recent years. A California man pleaded guilty earlier this year to attempting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2022. At Thursday's forum, none of the judges mentioned Trump by name. But several noted that the political environment has become much more charged since the start of his second term. When asked for comment on Thursday's hearing, a White House spokesperson decried the threats judges were facing. 'Attacks against public officials, including judges, have no place in our society and President Trump knows all too well the impact of callous attacks having faced two assassination attempts,' White House spokesperson Harrison Fields told POLITICO. Chief Judge John McConnell Jr., another Obama appointee who sits on the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, in February found himself embroiled in a battle with the White House over its attempts to freeze federal funding. Elon Musk, then a White House employee, called for McConnell's impeachment. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) put his face on a 'Wanted' poster of other judges in front of his office. And America First Legal, which is allied with the president, filed a judicial misconduct claim. McConnell's court received over 400 threatening voicemails, he said Thursday. He faced six credible death threats. And pizzas were delivered to the judge's home because 'they wanted to let us know that they knew where we lived,' he said. 'I'm not looking for pity, and I'm not looking for sympathy. I want to be able to just do my job again,' McConnell said. 'I want to be able to uphold the Constitution, and I want the public to speak out once again and support an independent judiciary.'
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Diddy Found Guilty on 2 Counts, Acquitted of Racketeering, Sex Trafficking
The final verdict in the Sean "Diddy" Combs federal criminal trial is in, and it's NOT GUILTY on 3 of the 5 counts -- they acquitted him of racketeering, sex trafficking of Cassie and sex trafficking of Jane. He's only been convicted on counts 3 and 5 ... which are both transportation for the purpose of prostitution, AKA the Mann Act. He faces a maximum sentence of 10 years for each of those counts. Wednesday morning, about an hour after jurors arrived and went straight into the jury room, the foreman sent a note out to Judge Arun Subramanian telling him they'd reached the unanimous verdict. All told, the 12-member jury -- 8 men and 4 women -- deliberated for two full days before reaching their final verdict Wednesday morning. As we reported ... the jury came back Tuesday and said they had a verdict on 4 of the 5 counts, but were unable to come to a verdict on the RICO charge. The judge told them to keep deliberating and on Wednesday they delivered their verdict. The trial featured nearly 7 weeks of testimony from 34 witnesses ... all called by the prosecutors. Diddy's defense team rested their case without calling a single witness, including Diddy, and instead, simply claimed the government failed to prove its case beyond a shadow of a doubt. Diddy's still got a potential out here -- there's always the chance he receives a pardon from President Trump, who has already said he'd consider it. Solve the daily Crossword
10 hours ago
Sean 'Diddy' Combs' attorneys ask court for acquittal or new trial
Attorneys for Sean "Diddy" Combs late Wednesday filed a motion asking that Combs' conviction earlier this month be thrown out or, barring that, that he be given a new trial. The 62-page motion, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues in part that the Mann Act, the law under which Combs was convicted July 2 on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, was too broadly interpreted to apply to Combs because "there was insufficient evidence that Mr. Combs transported anyone with the intent to engage in 'prostitution,' even if it includes any sex for money." The italicized "any" is included in the filing. The motion further argues that the Mann Act doesn't prohibit Combs' conduct "because he lacked a commercial motive and did not intend for paid escorts to have sex with him," with the italics again a part of the filing. The motion also states that "upholding the convictions would violate the First Amendment" because "paying people to film them in sexual performances" is "protected First Amendment activity." "At minimum, a new trial is required," the filing argues, "due to spillover prejudice from evidence that would have been inadmissible had the Mann Act counts been tried alone." That is, the evidence introduced attempting to prove the two counts of sex trafficking and one count of racketeering conspiracy, on which Combs was acquitted, was "inflammatory" and "was not admissible to prove the Mann Act counts." The jury in Combs' trial acquitted the hip-hop mogul and businessman of two counts of sex trafficking and of the most serious charge, one count of racketeering conspiracy. Evidence introduced during the six weeks of testimony included witness accounts of Combs hiring male escorts to have drug-fueled sexual encounters with at least two women – former girlfriend Cassie Ventura and another former Combs girlfriend who testified under the pseudonym "Jane" – while Combs watched and video-recorded the sessions. No evidence was presented to show Combs physically participated in those sessions, known as "freak-offs." Wednesday evening's filing comes one day after Combs' legal team also petitioned the court to release Combs on bail while he awaits sentencing on Oct. 3. The filing proposed that he post a $50 million bond and reside in his home in Miami while awaiting sentencing. "There has literally never been a case, like this one, where a person and his girlfriend arranged for adult men to have consensual sexual relations with the adult, long-term girlfriend as part of a demonstrated swingers lifestyle, and has been prosecuted and incarcerated under the Mann Act,' the defense letter asking for bail said. 'Sean Combs should not be in jail for this conduct." The same day Combs was convicted, presiding trial Judge Arun Subramanian declined to release Combs on bail prior to sentencing, citing a provision in the transportation to engage in prostitution law that the judge said presumes detention.
