Cordero v. Corbisiero

599 N.E.2d 670 (1992)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D's policy required that, following an administrative appeal, a suspension imposed for an infraction committed at the racetrack was to have been served at the meet the following year. this was known as the Saratoga Policy. D did not issue this policy according to the rulemaking procedures set forth in the State APA. P was P was cited for an infraction and appealed to D. P did not prevail, and D determined P must serve the penalty during Saratoga racing days. P contended that the policy had the attributes of a 'rule' and could not have been applied in his case because it was not formally promulgated by D pursuant to the APA rule-making procedures. D argued that the policy did not fit the definition of a rule because it only affected the implementation of a penalty, not the jockey's conduct. The courts along the way agreed with D. P appealed.