Arkansas Code Annotated
Ark. Code Ann. § 23-110-101 (2026)
Title
✓ current as of May 2026
This chapter shall be referred to and may be cited as the “Arkansas Horse Racing Law”.
History. Acts 1957, No. 46, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, § 84-2727.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1991–2007 · leading case: Gallas v. Alexander, 263 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2007).
Gallas v. Alexander, 263 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2007). “(B) "Electronic games of skill" does not include pari-mutuel wagering on horse racing and greyhound racing governed by the Arkansas Horse Racing Law, § 23-110-101 et seq., or the Arkansas Greyhound Racing Law, § 23-111-101 et seq.”
Register v. Oaklawn Jockey Club, Inc., 821 S.W.2d 475 (Ark. 1991). “Register’s second point of error, that Oaklawn and Amtote owed him a contractual duty on theories of implied contract, quasi-contract, and third party beneficiary, we note that horse racing in our state is authorized and regulated pursuant to the Arkansas Horse Racing Law (Law),…”
Meeks v. Greenville Casino Partners, L.P. (In Re Armstrong), 217 B.R. 569 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1998). “Arkansas law sanctions regulated horse racing under the Arkansas Horse Racing Law, Ark.Code Ann. § 23-110-101, et seq., and dog racing, under the Arkansas Greyhound Racing Law, Ark.”
Meeks v. Red River Ent. of Shreveport (In Re Armstrong), 231 B.R. 739 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1999). “Indeed, the legislature, in permitting gambling in Arkansas, has stated that horse racing “and activities related thereto in Arkansas have had a most significant favorable impact on the economy of the entire state and the welfare of our citizens and residents-” 1987 Ark.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.