On Tuesday, the USTA announced fines of $97,500 in
a case connected to the incarcerated former trainer.

by Dave Briggs and USTA communications

The U.S. Trotting Association’s (USTA) board of directors has fined six people and one farm a total of $97,500 — among other sanctions — for what USTA president Russell Williams told HRU involved “concealing” business dealings with incarcerated former trainer Nick Surick.

Surick is currently serving a five-year-and-two-months prison sentence as part of federal horse doping indictments of some 30 people in the standardbred and/or thoroughbred industries. He is currently in the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) in Lewisburg (PA). His release is scheduled for September, 2026.

“The problem was concealing Surick, not doing business with him,” Williams told HRU in an email. “The purpose of concealment was to either make a deal happen that wouldn’t have happened or get a better price than would’ve been obtained had Surick’s involvement been known.”

At its annual meeting on Sunday (March 9) in Columbus, OH, the USTA board voted to issue the sanctions to the parties judged to have violated USTA rules and/or bylaws.

The board relied upon the results of a nearly year-long probe conducted by the Standardbred Racing Investigative Fund (SRIF), which earlier this year reported its discoveries. The findings of violations resulted from an investigation into misconduct committed in connection with former USTA member Surick. In accordance with USTA Bylaw 8.01, the disciplinary actions may not be appealed.

Carson Morris, a partner in Philadelphia law firm Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads LLP that represents the SRIF, told HRU via email that, “The USTA and SRIF had reason to believe that Nick Surick remained active in the standardbred industry despite his legal troubles and USTA membership lapsing in September 2021. SRIF investigated whether this was true, and our investigation determined that certain USTA members had ongoing relationships with Mr. Surick involving registered standardbreds and may have engaged in misconduct in violation of the USTA’s rule and bylaws.”

On Tuesday (March 11) the USTA issued a press release that said the USTA members penalized and/or otherwise sanctioned are:

Joel Benson (Pompano Beach, FL): Two-year suspension of membership and a fine in the amount of $50,000 for violation of USTA Rule 20.06 (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member); USTA Bylaws 1:04(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(5).

Adam Bowden (Lexington, KY): A fine in the amount of $28,000 for violation of USTA Rule 20.06 (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member).

Diamond Creek Farm LLC (Wellsville, PA): A fine in the amount of $5,000 for violation of USTA Rule 26.16 (Failure to Submit Information).

Yannick Gingras (Allentown, NJ): A fine in the amount of $5,000 and a written reprimand for violation of USTA Rule 20.07 (Conspiracy to Commit Violation of Rules) in conspiring to violate USTA Rule 20.06 (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member).

Shaun R. Laungani (Lexington, KY): A fine in the amount of $7,000 for violation of USTA Rule 20.06 (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member).

Debbie Surick (Freehold, NJ): Permanent expulsion of membership for violation of USTA Rule 20.06 (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member); Rule 20.07 (Conspiracy to Commit Violation of Rules); Rule 20.15 (False Ownership); Rule 26.16 (Failure to Submit Information): Bylaws §§ 1.04(a)(7); 1.04(a)(2), and 1.04(a)(5).

Elizabeth C. Yontz (Paris, KY): A fine in the amount of $2,500, the entire sum suspended, and a written reprimand for violation of USTA Rule 20.06. (Fraudulent Misconduct by Member).

Bowden told HRU on Wednesday (March 12) that he was reluctant to speak publicly at this time about fines totaling $40,000 issued to himself, his farm, Diamond Creek, and Diamond Creek’s vice-president Shaun Laungani.

“We disagree with the way it was handled, we disagree with the sanctions, but we have no recourse and we paid the fines this morning so we can continue to do business,” Bowden said.

Otherwise, Bowden declined to comment further on the record about the case. It’s fair to say he’s not happy with the USTA penalties.

Gingras declined to comment on the case to HRU, texting, “As of now, I think I just want to put this behind me.”

Morris said SRIF’s investigations, “encountered a number of USTA members who had business contacts with Nick Surick and/or the individuals he was working with. Not all were alleged to have committed a violation, however, because contact with Mr. Surick alone did not in-and-of-itself violate the Rules. Rather, the Board found fault because the member(s) knew of the nature of Mr. Surick’s involvement, with the added fact that his involvement was concealed from others as part of the underlying business arrangement(s). This concealment would facilitate Mr. Surick and his collaborators’ ability to engage in the standardbred economy without others knowing he had a stake in the registered standardbreds in question. Not all the investigations involved this fact pattern, but the activity the [USTA] board concluded warranted sanctions involved the member(s) having a greater degree of knowledge and culpability.”

Asked if the USTA was trying to send a message with the case, Morris said, “Because these sanctions were imposed by the USTA’s board of directors pursuant to an investigation carried out on the association’s behalf, any message conveyed by the sanctions came from the USTA and its membership, not SRIF. While the USTA can speak for itself on this, in my view, imposition of these sanctions reflects the commitment of the association’s members to enforcing violations of their rules.

“The USTA is a member organization, and I have found widespread support among the membership for investigating and, when appropriate, sanctioning members who violate the rules that participants in the standardbred industry are required to follow. It is SRIF’s role to uncover violations of the rules while ensuring that the USTA members we investigate are treated fairly and that the results we produce are balanced and reliable. Similarly, we work with the USTA to make sure the adjudication of a rule violation and the imposition of a sanction occurs in compliance with the association’s rules and bylaws and respects the rights of the members in question.”

In the USTA’s press release, Williams said the industry can expect more investigations.

“These investigations are the first to be completed but they will not be the last,” Williams said. “The alliance between the Standardbred Racing Investigative Fund and U.S. Trotting will enhance protection of USTA data integrity, including registration and transfer of horses. It will also encourage transparency and fair dealing among the membership. USTA staff handled these matters with the utmost competence. Our board made its determinations fairly and resolutely.”

Morris told HRU that, “while Rule 20.06 contains somewhat open-ended language pertaining to ‘fraudulent’ conduct, it specifically forbids fraudulent or corrupt conduct that ‘affects[s]… a false registration or any other act injurious to the sport.’ The USTA is the keeper of the standardbred registry, and that is arguably where its greatest powers lie. To register a standardbred horse with the USTA, all owners must be members of the association. See USTA Rule 26.01 [you can find a link to the USTA’s Rules and Bylawshere].

“Depending on the facts of a case, these and related rules prohibit the practice of ‘bearding,’ or the false ownership of a registered standardbred by someone other than the actual owner. The same principles can apply to trainers and other actors in the industry. There are other rules related to the false ownership and registration of standardbreds. See, e.g., Rule 26.12 (Fraudulent Transfer), Rule 20.07 (Conspiracy to Commit Violation of Rules). There were also sanctions imposed for failing to provide records requested by SRIF/the USTA. See 26.16. Not all violations of Rule 20.06 relate to bearding but, according to the elements of the Rule/violation, they all involve fraudulent/deceptive misconduct.”

Morris said it’s important to note that the USTA, at last weekend’s annual meeting, bolstered its enforcement and investigative powers.

“The revised and new rules will go into effect on May 1, 2025,” Morris said, “and include, among other improvements: eliminating the $5,000 maximum fine per rule violation (note the $5,000 fines imposed as part of the recent sanctions); integrating the concept of a ‘person not in good standing’ into the Rules; adding aiding and abetting as an independent basis for a violation (a potentially important tool in discouraging USTA members from working with non or suspended members); rule changes focused on false or ‘beard’ trainers specifically; and strengthening the USTA’s right to demand records from its members, including by requiring the signing of an unsworn declaration under penalty of perjury in responding to a record request. These revisions were informed by SRIF’s investigations and further demonstrate the USTA’s institutional commitment to integrity and enforcement.”

Morris said more sanctions could be coming.

“SRIF has several investigations underway that we expect will render results, but I cannot comment on them, and we do not presuppose that the USTA will ultimately find a violation,” Morris said. “All our investigations are kept confidential, which is important to protect the reputations of those under investigation and instill a sense of fairness in what we do. It also (hopefully) encourages trust and cooperation by the USTA’s membership in SRIF’s investigations and is critical to our ability to carry out our work.”

As for whether this case indicated a sea change toward stronger integrity at the USTA, Morris said:

“From my experience with the USTA, I don’t believe the association and its members failed to take integrity seriously in the past. To the extent the USTA was not enforcing its rules in the same manner, that was primarily because of a lack of understanding and appreciation of the powers it had to investigate and enforce violations under its rules and bylaws, particularly in relation to the powers of state racing commissions.

“Through my discussions with officials at the USTA, I came to appreciate the problems in the industry. From my experience as a prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, and in collaboration with my colleague Vicki Humphries, who is SRIF’s lead investigator and a former FBI agent, we saw ways the USTA could investigate and enforce violations of its rules and bylaws that I don’t think the association realized it was capable of previously.

“Also, I grew up on a horse farm in Kentucky and was brought up in the commercial breeding industry, which influenced our understanding of what the standardbred industry is; particularly how the standardbred economy functions in relation to the ownership and registration of horses. That allowed us to put the pieces together and come up with what I think is a more effective enforcement model for the USTA.

“With a solid plan, investigative expertise, sufficient resources, and, most importantly — the will among the USTA’s membership to make it happen — SRIF and the USTA are better positioned to bolster integrity and in the standardbred industry.”