The Kentucky Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a lawsuit filed against a former Kentucky trainer and Churchill Downs by a woman who was bitten by a horse on the Churchill Downs backstretch.
The incident occurred on May 5, 2018, the day of the Kentucky Derby (G1), after Joi Denise Roby was invited to trainer William "Buff" Bradley's barn by one of Bradley's owners. According to briefs filed with the Supreme Court, Roby was walking through the barn, petting and feeding peppermints to horses, when Bradley’s stable pony allegedly "lifted up his head, lunged toward her, and bit her" resulting in, according to Roby's brief, surgery and permanent disfigurement.
In 2019 she sued for damages in Jefferson Circuit Court in Louisville. The court granted Bradley's stable and Churchill Downs summary judgment, finding there was no dispute about the facts, and the defendants were entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law.
Specifically, the court found Roby was not invited to the barn by Bradley; that she was not given permission to interact with the stable pony; that Churchill Downs controlled the property pursuant to its stall agreement with Bradley; and that the track met its legal duty by posting "signage warning of the potentially dangerous nature of horses" in conformity with the Kentucky's Farm Animal Activity Act. The court noted Roby "was aware that horses can be unpredictable and she could merely have avoided the horse.”
Roby appealed, and the Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled she should have been granted a jury trial based on ordinary negligence principles. The Supreme Court, which does not automatically accept appeals, agreed to review that ruling.
The FAAA is an immunity statute that provides in pertinent part, "no participant...who has been reasonably warned of the inherent risks of farm animal activities shall make any claim against, maintain an action against, or recover from a farm animal activity sponsor, a farm animal professional, or any other person for injury...resulting from any of the inherent risks of farm animal activities."
The Court of Appeals ruled that a "horse racing exception" statute pierced Bradley's immunity. That statute, KRS 427.4025, says the immunity statute "shall not apply to farm animal activity sponsors, farm animal activity professionals, persons, or participants when engaged in horse racing activities."
Bradley, a respected Breeders' Cup-winning trainer who retired from that profession in 2021 and now works for Keeneland as an associate of sales development, contends the stable was not engaged in racing activities when the injury occurred. Although a stable pony leads horses onto the track for morning training and some do so before races, the court record indicates there is no dispute the bite occurred while the pony was in its stall. Roby takes the position Bradley's stable was engaged in horse racing activities that day regardless of the pony's location.
Roby's brief also urges the court to rule that a Louisville ordinance trumps the state immunity statute. The ordinance establishes strict liability, a legal term meaning absolute liability, on owners of animals that cause personal injury or property damage. In considering this argument, the high court would have to review whether the state statute preempts or displaces the local ordinance.
Many trainers commonly permit owners and other guests to pet and/or feed horses when they are in their stalls in many barn shedrows.
Oral arguments will be heard this week.
