The USDC for Western District of Texas (Austin Division) found that the Texas "in-person" gaming requirement with respect to advanced deposit wagering does not discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce. The court also found that the Texas Racing Commission Defendants demonstrated to the Court's satisfaction that the "in-person" regulatory requirement comported with the demands of the US Constitution and does not transgress the Dormant Commerce Clause (DCC) doctrine. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the case brought by Plaintiff Churchill Downs and entered judgment on behalf of the Defendants.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Published In: Antitrust & Trade Regulation Updates, Art, Entertainment & Sports Updates, Business Organization Updates, Constitutional Law Updates, Science, Computers & Technology Updates
Reference Info:Decision | Federal, 5th Circuit, Texas | United States
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Ian Imrich, Law Offices of Ian J. Imrich, APC | Attorney Advertising