IHRC's Administrative Law Judge - You Be The Judge

On February 15th, Indiana Breeder & Owner Protection, Inc. (IBOP) expressed our outrage (and filed multiple public records requests) to Indiana Horse Racing Commission (IHRC) Chairman Bill Diener and General Counsel Lea Ellingwood regarding one of the administrative law judges (ALJ) under contract with the IHRC. We voiced our outrage that ALJ Kathryn (Janeway) Hostetter, who had been arrested twice in 2012 for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, was still in a position to pass judgment on horseman through the IHRC's adjudication process. On February 22nd, The Blood-Horse picked up this story which can be read at the following link:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/76418/ihrc-cuts-ties-with-administrative-judge

This particular article will expand on a few facts included in the Blood-Horse article, challenge some of the statements made by the IHRC's General Counsel, raise a few issues not covered in the Blood-Horse article and provide documentation so you can judge for yourself. The documents and links provided in this article are all available as public records.

According to the Chronological Case Summary, https://mycase.in.gov with a case number of 32D02-1202-CM-000156 under Criminal & Citation Case Records, Mrs. Hostetter was arrested on Wednesday, February 8, 2012, with charges of operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person, following too closely, and speeding in a school zone. The latter two charges were dismissed as part of a plea agreement on February 24, 2012 which included a judgment of a conviction on the charge of operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person, which is a Class A misdemeanor. In Indiana, operating a vehicle while intoxicated is a Class C misdemeanor which is a lesser offense than the Class A misdemeanor.

Mrs. Hostetter was sentenced to 365 days of confinement and given two days of jail credit and 363 days suspended which required her to be on probation. In addition, the plea agreement required a substance abuse evaluation and treatment plan through IU Health Methodist Hospital, 20 hours of community service, a 30-day suspended license followed by 180 days of a restricted license, and an order to attend a Survivor's Speak Out Program.

As you will see from The Blood-Horse article, Mrs. Hostetter was also employed as a Deputy Prosector for Hendricks County (Ind.). IBOP filed a public records request with the human resources department for Hendricks County for verification of Mrs. Hostetter's employment dates. Follow this link to the file we received from Hendricks County Human Resources Director Ronald Love: http://freepdfhosting.com/35d16ae599.pdf What you will see is that Mrs. Hostetter, Janeway at the time, was first employed as a Deputy Prosecutor with Hendricks County on January 16, 2007 at a salary of $43,000. What you will also see is that Mrs. Hostetter was terminated from her position effective on February 8, 2012 which was the date of her first arrest. She is also indicated as not being subject to rehire. At the time of her termination, she was earning a salary of $58,711. While she was immediately terminated from her role as a deputy prosecutor for a govermental agency, the question we are raising is should the IHRC, another governmental agency, have also immediately terminated her contract as an ALJ? Because of her conviction Mrs. Hostetter was facing her own administrative proceeding that could have had an affect on her ability to practice law in Indiana, but you be the judge.

On January 28, 2013, Mrs. (Janeway) Hostetter was disciplined for her first offense by the Indiana Supreme Court in the form of a public reprimand. The order from the Indiana Supreme Court can be found at the following link: http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-32S00-1207-DI-421.pdf What you will see is that Mrs. Hostetter agreed to violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(d), which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. This admitted violation was pointed out in the Blood-Horse article; however, let's examine the phrase "prejudicial to the administration of justice."

As an ALJ for the IHRC, Mrs. Hostetter was contracted as part of what the IHRC believes is the administration of justice where administrative proceedings are concerned. When we consulted Bing Dictionary, the first definition of prejudicial is "resulting in harm: causing disadvantage or harm to somebody or something." In this case then, Mrs. Hostetter admitted to causing disadvantage or harm to the administration of justice. With her admission, did the disadvantage or the harm begin when she was arrested on February 8, 2012 or with the Indiana Supreme Court's reprimand on January 28, 2013? You be the judge.

As noted in The Blood-Horse article, Mrs. Hostetter was once again arrested on December 3, 2012. The Chronological Case Summary,
https://mycase.in.gov with a case number of 32D02-1302-FD-000123 under Criminal & Citation Case Records, indicates that Mrs. Hostetter was arrested for operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person which due to her prior conviction is now a Class D felony. She was also charged with having a blood alcohol content of .15% or greater (the legal limit in Indiana is .08%), following too closely, and traveling at an unreasonable speed for the conditions. Mrs. Hostetter's initial hearing on these charges is scheduled for March 22, 2013. As with anyone, Mrs. Hostetter should be assumed to be innocent until proven otherwise. IBOP was founded on the concept of the protection of rights, and Mrs. Hostetter is entitled to the very same presumption. With her second arrest, an initial hearing on a possible probation violation was scheduled for February 22, 2013, and that hearing was continued with no date scheduled at this time.

You can infer from The Blood-Horse article that the IHRC knew about Mrs. Hostetter's conviction. IBOP has filed public records requests for correspondence between the IHRC staff, the Attorney General's Office, and each individual commissioner in this matter. The goal is to determine who knew what and when, in an effort to provide transparency on why Mrs. Hostetter wasn't immediately terminated. According to state law 'IC 4-21.5-3-10 Disqualification of administrative law judge' through "Sec. 10. (a) Any individual serving or designated to serve alone or with others as an administrative law judge is subject to disqualification for: (1)....(4) any cause for which a judge of a court may be disqualified." In short, judges are supposed to follow the law and an arrest and conviction would be grounds to have a judge removed. But, you be the judge.

After IBOP informed the IHRC of Mrs. Hostetter's second arrest, we were told by Chairman Bill Diener that he instructed the IHRC staff to report this information to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. While Mrs. Hostetter self-reported her first arrest and conviction to the both the IHRC and the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, she did not self-report her second arrest to either as required. Does a failure to comply with a professional, ethical, and contractual obligation expose a person's character? Again, you be the judge.

While not a direct quote from Ms. Ellingwood, The Blood-Horse article suggests that since no criminal matters were pending when Mrs. Hostetter's contract came up for renewal, which was on June 30, 2012, that the IHRC had no issue with renewing her contract. Our view is that every day a person wakes up while on probation, there is a pending legal issue until the probation expires. Would a licensee, under IHRC probation, not have to report the probation as a pending matter with any other racing jurisdiction when applying for a license? The article also suggests that "no questions were raised about Hostetter's ability to do her job or complaints about her performance throughout 2012." We see that reported statement, if accurate, as being abolutely false.

Mrs. Hostetter's most high profile case was sitting in judgment of Janey Adams, an owner-trainer accused of mistreating a horse. Ms. Adams was summarily suspended by the IHRC in July, 2011, with a recommended penalty of a 10-year license suspension. Ms. Adams appealed the suspension and Mrs. Hostetter assigned as the ALJ. Ms. Adams requested a stay from the suspension while her appeal was being adjudicated. That motion for a stay was denied by Mrs. Hostetter. On June 23, 2012, the third day of Ms. Adams hearing in front of Mrs. Hostetter, IHRC attorney Robin Babbitt asked to read from the stay petition. Mrs. Hostetter responded, "Sure. Can you remind me, was the stay granted or denied?" (Page 591, Lines 17 through 18 of the offical transcript) While she was the one who denied the stay, after months of being the ALJ and three days of hearings, she had to be reminded of her own actions. This fact was pointed out to the IHRC in IBOP's communication regarding Mrs. Hostetter's second arrest. We were directly commenting on her performance as an ALJ.

Also, Michael Red, who represented Ms. Adams, questioned Mrs. Hostetter's preformance as an ALJ directly in front of the IHRC on August 30, 2012. Once an ALJ authors an opinion on a matter, the IHRC holds a hearing to consider the opinion. Mr. Red delivered multiple complaints about Mrs. Hostetter as an ALJ. With the 'judge for yourself' theme, this link will take you to pages 11 through 16 of the official transcript of the August 30, 2012 hearing: http://freepdfhosting.com/a4062715a3.pdf. What you'll see is Mr. Red raises significant questions about Mrs. Hostetter's ability to do her job. In addition, the result of the August 30th hearing was that the IHRC remanded Mrs. Hostetter's opinion, meaning the opinion was sent back to her, with instructions that pointed out that she hadn't done her job correctly. So, the IHRC even had issues with Mrs. Hostetter's performance as an ALJ. The relevant pages from the transcript regarding the remand decision can be found at the following link: http://freepdfhosting.com/baee1ad912.pdf

We also take issue with a quote from Ms. Ellingwood in The Blood-Horse article with her saying, "We have a very active commission that carefully vets all cases sent along for review." That is hardy the case. At the beginning of page 13 of the above mentioned transcript, one of the commissioners actually interrupted Mr. Red to ask if the horse in question was a race horse. A commissioner who would have 'vetted' a case (or even cared to read the case) where a person's livlihood is possibly at risk would never have asked such a ignorant question.

While this article is not intended to delve into Ms. Adams case, it does serve as an example of Mrs. Hostetter's sutiability as an ALJ. However, we've found an even more potentially egregious issue, and we stress potentially, as it relates to Mrs. Hostetter and her contract renewal with the IHRC. Mrs. Hostetter's contract, which paid her $175 per hour, expired on June 30, 2012. The same terms applied to her new two-year contract which can be found at the following link: https://fs85.gmis.in.gov/IDOAcontracts/public/66209-000.pdf. As you will see, the Executive Document Summary indicates a "Date Prepared" of August 15, 2012 which is six weeks after her prior contract's expiration. Mrs. Hostetter's signature was applied to the contract on August 16, 2012. In between the one contract's expiration on June 30, 2012, and August 15, 2012, Mrs. Hostetter delivered her opinion on Ms. Adams to the IHRC.

The apperance of impropriety of Mrs. Hostetter first delivering her opinion in support of a 10-year suspension for Ms. Adams, which was issued on July 23, 2012, then signing a new contract has significance, especially considering that IHRC Executive Director signed the contract on behalf of the IHRC with a date of Sunday, July 1, 2012. We've pointed this peculiarity out to Chairman Diener. We've received no explanation, but you be the judge.