Opinion ID: 1697798
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Revocation of Racing Commission License

Text: In August 2001, the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission revoked Roseberry's probationary vocational license. A notice granting the initial license stated that it was probationary because of a history of various and serious rule violations at different racetracks from 1989 through 1994. It also noted that he had submitted a license application that failed to disclose a 1993 Nebraska suspension. When the license was revoked, the Iowa board of stewards investigated treatment reports submitted by Roseberry that listed medication different from that detailed in his billing statements. The board found that during the investigation, Roseberry told stewards that the reports were different because sometimes he would perform procedures that the trainers did not want the owners to know about. The board found that he later failed to comply with a request to produce a log book. The board further found that he violated commission rules and that his conduct was unethical, deceptive, objectionable, dishonest, [and] dangerous to the welfare of the public, racing participants, and the horses under [Roseberry's] care, and detrimental to the integrity of racing in the state of Iowa. The board also found other violations and noted actions on his license in Nebraska and that the Idaho Board of Veterinary Medicine had denied him a temporary permit application. A stipulation to dismiss the appeal required that Roseberry not apply for a 2002 license and left open the resolution of issues raised in the revocation proceeding if he applied again. Although Roseberry disclosed the revocation and appeal in his Nebraska bar application, he failed to disclose the finding that he had engaged in unethical conduct. According to Roseberry, the license was probationary largely because he had been away from veterinary practice while attending law school. He stated that the notation about failing to report a suspension was an error by the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission. His application for the Iowa license shows a Nebraska suspension in 1992. According to Roseberry, someone made a false representation about his recording and documenting prescription drugs at the racetrack. He testified that his license was initially removed without a hearing. According to Roseberry, when a hearing was held, the board of stewards would not allow him to call witnesses and was told to save it for the appeal. According to Roseberry, the drugs provided and the drugs billed were the same, but he may have written the common name on one document and the trade name or generic name on another because he used the common name with owners. Roseberry denies that he made any statements to the board of stewards about drugs being given and hidden from the owners and stated that he turned in his medication log books everyday. Several people testified for Roseberry. A racehorse owner stated that sanctions at racetracks were common. He also stated that in his opinion, Roseberry was honest and ethical. A former classmate of Roseberry also testified that Roseberry had good moral character. A veterinary assistant for Roseberry at the time of his license suspension testified that she had witnessed him refuse to do things that were unethical or against the racing rules, such as administer medication at the urging of a trainer on a race day. The assistant compared racetrack sanctions, especially at the track where Roseberry's license was suspended, to being like a meter lady would give out parking tickets. She also supported his assertions that he turned in his medication log books and listed the same drug on the logs and in billing, but often with the common name used for the bill. The Commission voted to deny Roseberry's application. Roseberry appeals.