DeveLopments by gdf57j


									t h e anim a l l aw p r o g r a m ANIM AL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND

                                                                                     volume xI number 7 • summer 2009

  in this issue:

 developments                      1
 the story contInues...            4       aLDF sues to Rescue starving horses in horrific
 prosecutor puzzler                4       Wake County, nC neglect Case
                                           Lawsuits follow emergency rescues of 7 emaciated horses, but it was too late
 around the world                  5       for an 8th who died in extreme pain of starvation
 new legIslatIon                   5
                                                   Raleigh, NC - ALDF, the United States       petition to recover the costs it incurred while
 announcements                     6               Equine Rescue League (USERL), and           caring for the neglected horses, ordering
                                            a county animal cruelty investigator filed a       the Keatings to pay $8,372.46. When the
 a day In the lIfe at aldf         7        complaint on January 12, 2009, in Wake             Keatings failed to pay this amount, they
 denotes aldf-supported projects            County District Court against Michael, Judy,       forfeited the horses to ALDF and USERL, who
                                            and Gayle Keating of Willow Springs, for           will now place them in permanent adoptive
                                            severely neglecting eight horses whom they         homes. In a parallel case, ALDF, USERL, and
                                            starved—in one case, literally to death—           another county animal cruelty investigator
                                            and deprived of all veterinary care. ALDF          sued Joel Simpson, a family friend of the
                                            sought permanent custody of the abused             Keatings, who took possession of Groucho,
                                            animals, as well as the costs of caring for        the Keatings’ stallion, after the filing of the
                                            the animals, including expenses for medical        original case. On May 19, 2009, the Johnston
                                            care. The lawsuit was filed under the state’s      County District Court granted USERL’s petition
                                            Civil Remedy for Protection of Animals statute     to recoup the costs of caring for Groucho,
                                            (Chapter 19A), a law unique to North Carolina      ordering Simpson to pay $1,831. ALDF and
                                            that allows a private citizen or organization to   USERL gained permanent custody of Groucho
                                            file suit to stop animal cruelty. ALDF has used    after Simpson failed to pay the amount
                                            North Carolina’s Chapter 19A three times           ordered. Like the other horses, Groucho will
                                            before seeking permanent injunctions against       be adopted through USERL’s extensive rescue
                                            North Carolina animal abusers, ultimately          network. ALDF v. Keating, No. 09 CV 000706,
                                            winning custody of hundreds of dogs from           Wake County, NC, Gen. Ct. of Justice, Dist. Ct.
                                            animal hoarders and breeders who were              Div.; related case ALDF v. Simpson, No. 09
                                            keeping their severely neglected animals in        CV 01162, Johnston County, NC, Gen. Ct. of
                                            filthy conditions. On February 17, 2009, the       Justice, Dist. Ct. Div.; see also
                                            Wake County District Court granted USERL’s         article.php?id=801. ALDF 214.00

volume xI

number     7
                                          a newsletter for attorney members of the anImal legal defense fund
                                                                                                             summer 2009
                           aLDF takes Kentucky Counties to task for Failing to protect
                           homeless Dogs and Cats
                           Decrepit county facilities brought under fire for falling far short of standards mandated by
   the shelter will also   state’s humane shelter law; one victory already achieved thus far
  segregate dogs from             Kentucky - On August 20th, 2008,                year and begin housing dogs and cats the
   cats, sick or injured          outraged citizens filed concurrent
                           lawsuits in Estill and Robertson counties,
                                                                                  next day. The new shelter will provide a higher
                                                                                  standard of care and a superior home for the
  animals from healthy     assailing the counties for failing to provide          animals, and adequate veterinary care will be
                           basic, humane conditions for stray dogs and            a guarantee. The shelter will also segregate
  animals, males from      cats, as mandated by Kentucky’s Humane                 dogs from cats, sick or injured animals from
                           Shelter Law. While the state legislature had           healthy animals, males from females, and
females, and aggressive    allowed the counties three years (until July           aggressive animals from all others. Nursing
animals from all others.   13, 2007) to come into compliance with
                           most standards, it was asserted that both
                                                                                  mothers and their young will also be kept
                                                                                  apart from other animals. Meanwhile,
                           counties remained in violation of many of the          the fight to get Estill County to protect its
                           law’s mandates, to the ongoing detriment of            animals in compliance with Kentucky state
                           both their homeless animals and the residents          law continues—although a motion to dismiss
                           and taxpayers who care about their welfare.            brought by the defendants was rejected
                           On March 9, 2009, ALDF’s efforts provided              by the county court on February 9, 2009.
                           complete victory for the Robertson County              Penrod v. County of Robertson, et al., Cir. Ct.,
                           animals. According to an agreed order of               18th Jud. Cir., KY, No. 08-CI-00025; Kasey
                           judgment issued by Robertson County’s 18th             v. County of Estill, et al., Estill Cir. Ct., KY,
                           Circuit Court, a new and largely improved              No. 08-CJ-239; see also
                           shelter must be completed by July 1st of this          article.php?id=675. ALDF 214.20

                           illinois appellate Court increases Damage award to the owners of
                           injured Dachshund to the amount of the veterinary expenses they
                           incurred instead of Fair market value
                           Appellate court states that when the cost of repairs exceeds the fair market value of the
                           personal property, the value of the personal property becomes the ceiling on the amount of
                           damages that can be recovered

                           App. Ct. of Ill., Fourth Dist. - Plaintiffs Mark and   photographs, trophies, and pets, had no market
                           Mindy Leith sued defendant Andrew E. Frost             value. The court opined that damages for harm
                           for tortious damage to their personal property,        to such items of property were not restricted
                           a dachshund named Molly. In a bench trial,             to nominal damages; rather, damages had
                           plaintiffs presented evidence that defendant’s         to be ascertained in some rational way from
                           Siberian huskie, Cosmo, intruded into their            such elements as were attainable. The court
                           backyard and attacked Molly. The trial court           further determined that the proper basis for
                           found in plaintiffs’ favor but awarded them            assessing compensatory damages in such a
                           only $200, Molly’s fair market value, rather           case was to determine the item’s actual value
                           than the $4,784 in veterinary expenses they            to a plaintiff and that the plaintiff was entitled
                           were seeking. Plaintiffs appealed from the             to demonstrate its value by such proof as the
                           award of damages, and defendant appealed               circumstances admitted. The court ruled that
                           from the finding of liability. To prevent the          when an injured pet dog with no discernable
                           award of damages from being merely nominal,            market value is restored to its previous health,
volume xI                  the appellate court modified the trial court’s         the measure of damages may include, but is
                           judgment so as to award plaintiffs $4,784              not limited to, the reasonable and customary
                           in damages. Otherwise, the court affirmed              cost of necessary veterinary care and
                           the judgment. The court held that certain              treatment. Leith v. Frost, 387 Ill. App. 3d 430
number   7                 items of personal property, such as heirlooms,         (Ill. App. Ct. 4th Dist. 2008).
 3summer 2009

preliminary injunction issued by California Federal Court enjoining enforcement
of California penal Code §599f against swine slaughterhouses Regulated by the
Federal meat inspection act
ALDF is an intervenor in the action

       U.S. Dist. Ct., Eastern Dist. Cal. - Plaintiff   in response to video footage obtained by the     asserted that §599f expanded the scope
       National Meat Association moved the              Humane Society of inhumane treatment             of criminal penalties imposed on such
Court for a preliminary injunction enjoining            of animals at a slaughterhouse facility. In      slaughterhouses and their employees for
defendants Edmund G. Brown, Arnold                      addition to the concern for the humane           violations of the statute. The court ruled in
Schwarzenegger, and the State of California             treatment of the animals, the public health      favor of plaintiff on February 19, 2009, citing
from enforcing California Penal Code §599f,             concern was raised as to the meat derived        as its main reason for granting the injunction
as amended and effective January 1, 2009,               from “downed animals,” as such animals           plaintiff’s argument that §599f’s provisions,
against swine slaughterhouses regulated                 may be susceptible to various diseases           as applied to swine slaughterhouses in
by the Federal Meat Inspection Act, 21                  and have a greater likelihood of carrying        the State of California, conflicted with
U.S.C.S. §601 et seq. (FMIA). Defendant                 disease, which can be passed onto humans         those imposed under the FMIA, and its
intervenors included the Humane Society                 from contaminated meat. Plaintiff argued         implementing regulations. The court held
of the United States, Farm Sanctuary, Inc.,             that §599f would expand dramatically             that FMIA’s preemption clause expressly
the Humane Farming Association, and ALDF.               the restrictions and prohibitions governing      limited states in their ability to govern meat
California Penal Code §599f, as amended,                the manner in which federally-inspected          inspection and labeling requirements “of
prohibits the sale of meat or meat product              slaughterhouses in California, including         any establishment at which inspection is
of “nonambulatory” animals for human                    those that slaughter swine, may purchase         provided [under the statute].” 21 U.S.C.S.
consumption, and requires the immediate                 and process livestock for slaughter and          §678. Nat’l Meat Ass’n v. Brown, 2009
euthanization of nonambulatory animals.                 the manner in which they may sell meat,          U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12523 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 19,
Defendants argued that §599f was amended                including pork and pork products. Plaintiff      2009). ALDF 401.30

Florida Court of appeal Finds that it Lacks Jurisdiction to Review a trial Court’s
Decision to Reject a Jury’s verdict in an abuse Case and to Reduce the Conviction
of Defendant from Felony Cruelty to animals to a misdemeanor
ALDF filed amicus brief at trial level; strongly worded special concurrence written

      Super. Ct. of NJ, App. Div. - Plaintiff           matter of law. The appellate court agreed and    party for the special subjective benefits he
      Doreen Houseman appealed from a                   remanded for further proceedings finding that    or she derives from possession. On the same
judgment of the Family Part awarding her                the remedy of specific performance can be        reasoning, the court decided, when personal
$1,500 for a dog she and defendant Eric                 invoked to address a breach of an enforceable    property has such special subjective value
Dare jointly owned when they separated                  agreement when money damages are not             courts have determined that an award of
and ended their engagement to be married.               adequate to protect the expectation interest     possession of personalty is the only adequate
Alleging that she and Dare had an oral                  of the injured party and an order requiring      remedy for tortious acquisition and wrongful
agreement giving her possession of the dog              performance of the contract will not result      detention of property. The court concluded
that Dare breached by wrongfully retaining              in inequity to the offending party, reward the   that the trial court erred by declining to
the dog after a post-separation visit,                  recipient for unfair dealing, or conflict with   consider the relevance of the oral agreement
Houseman sought specific performance of                 public policy. The court ruled that specific     alleged on the ground that a pet is property.
the agreement and a judgment declaring her              performance is generally recognized as the       Further, agreements about property jointly
ownership of her beloved dog. Prior to trial,           appropriate remedy when an agreement             held by cohabitants are material in actions
the trial court determined that pets were               concerns possession of property such as          concerning its division and they may be
personal property that lacked the unique                “heirlooms, family treasures and works           specifically enforced when that remedy is
value essential to an award of specific                 of art that induce a strong sentimental          appropriate. Houseman v. Dare, 405 N.J.
performance. On appeal, Houseman claimed                attachment.” That is so because money            Super. 538 (App. Div. 2009). ALDF 271.10
that the pretrial ruling was erroneous as a             damages cannot compensate the injured

                                                                                       the anImal law program anImal legal defense fund
                                                                                                        summer 2009
                                 the stoRy Continues...
   rather than pay the
   expense of veterinary
                            Damages suit against vets and pharmacy for
  exams and treatment,      Cats’ Deaths heard by vermont sup. Ct.
                            Plaintiffs’ issues were those of first impression in Vermont; ALDF filed an amicus brief
 elmer Zimmerman and
    his brother ammon             Montpelier, VT - Plaintiffs, Susan
                                  Goodby and Robert Goodby, filed
                                                                              dismissed, they appealed to the Vermont
                                                                              Supreme Court. On May 9, 2009, that court
Zimmerman shot to death     suit against various veterinarians and a pet
                            pharmacy, alleging that both of their cats had
                                                                              held that the case presented two questions:
                                                                              first, whether noneconomic damages were
 nearly the entire kennel   died as a result of taking an overdose of their   available when a pet dies due to negligent
                            prescribed hypertension medication. It was        or wanton acts of veterinarians and a
  population of 80 dogs.    discovered that the medication, amlodopine,       pharmaceutical company; second, whether
                            that was given to the Goodbys actually            a claim for negligent infliction of emotional
                            contained a toxic dose of amlodopine. The         distress could be allowed for the death of
                            cats soon died of severe drug toxicity caused     a pet when its human companion was not
                            by the overdose of the drug. The Goodbys          within any so-called zone of danger at the
                            alleged that the pharmacy violated several        time of the mishap. The court answered both
                            consumer protection laws and that the             questions in the negative and affirmed the
                            various veterinarians engaged in negligence       superior court’s order of dismissal. Goodby
                            and negligent infliction of emotional distress.   v. Vetpharm, Inc., d/b/a BCP Veterinary
                            They specifically claimed noneconomic             Pharmacy, et al., 2009 VT 52, Vt. Sup. Ct.
                            damages, including loss of companionship,         Docket Number 2008-030; Lamoille County
                            loss of society, and emotional distress.          Super. Ct., Vt., No. 252-12-04 Lecv. ALDF
                            After the Goodbys’ economic claims were           Update, Summer 2008, p. 2. ALDF 285.10

                                 pRoseCutoR puZZLeR
                            How good are your state’s laws for                poodles, shih tzus and cocker spaniels),
                            prosecuting animal cruelty? ALDF invites          threw their bodies on a compost pile and
                            you to examine your state’s laws via the          used a backhoe to cover them. Zimmerman
                            following “puzzler” scenario to consider          reported to the dog warden that he had shot
                            new ways your laws could be improved. The         the dogs and uncovered the evidence for the
                            following is an actual case of animal cruelty     incredulous dog warden.
                            reported to ALDF.
                            On July 24, 2008, a dog warden inspected a        youR ChaLLenge:
                            kennel owned by breeder Elmer Zimmerman           What criminal charges could you bring
                            and ordered veterinary checks on 39 dogs          against the suspect?
                            for flea and fly bites. The dog warden issued
                            four citations for maintenance, extreme heat,     Do your state’s anti-cruelty laws allow
                            insufficient bedding, and wire flooring that      people to shoot animals they own?
                            allowed dogs’ feet to fall through. Previous
                                                                              Are there separate regulations for
                            inspections had not resulted in citations
                                                                              breeders or kennels?
                            but noted severe matting of dogs’ fur and
volume xI                   inadequate shelter. Rather than pay the           Are there possible environmental
                            expense of veterinary exams and treatment,        laws that may be relevant regarding
                            Elmer Zimmerman and his brother Ammon             the dogs’ disposal?
                            Zimmerman shot to death nearly the entire
number   7                  kennel population of 80 dogs (including           For the actual disposition of this case, see p. 6
 5summer 2009

      aRounD the WoRLD
ecuador votes to Recognize inalienable Rights of nature in new Constitution                                       “every person, people,
Groundbreaking articles change status of nature from mere property to a rights-bearing entity
                                                                                                                       community or
Ecuador - The country’s environment, which has
many diverse ecosystems, including the wildlife-
                                                          states: “Nature or Pachamama (a Quechua word
                                                          meaning Mother Earth), where life is reproduced
                                                                                                                     nationality will be
rich Galapagos Islands, has faced sometimes cata-         and exists, has the right to exist, persist, maintain     able to demand the
strophic injury as a result of working with multi-        and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions
national companies, seeing its cache of natural           and its processes in evolution.” In the next sec-        recognition of rights
resources exploited with little positive rewards for      tion, provisions allow for legal action against pol-
the country. To assist in the fight against further de-   luters by giving legal standing to citizens in such      for nature before the
struction and decline, the country overwhelmingly         situations: “Every person, people, community or
voted at the end of September 2008 to defend the          nationality will be able to demand the recognition        public organisms.”
rights of nature through the precedent-setting step       of rights for nature before the public organisms.”
of adding protective language to their constitution., October 24, 2008,
In the chapter titled “Rights for Nature,” Article 1      and, September 24, 2008.

israeli high Court of Justice strikes down Controversial Real estate
Development plan in part to protect animal Rights
Precedential case listed an endangered fallow deer as a party to the suit

Israel - In September 2008, the High Court of             ture in Israel (SPNI), claimed that the construc-
Justice decided in favor of objecting residents           tion would have damaged the environment. Su-
near the western Jerusalem neighborhood of                preme Court President Dorit Beinisch accepted
Ramot who had instituted a legal and public               the petitioners’ claim that a subcommittee of
campaign against a 20,000-unit housing devel-             the National Planning and Construction Council
opment project. What made the decision such               had exceeded its authority when it approved the
an historic precedent was that the residents’ at-         housing plan. It was also ruled that the subcom-
torney named a fallow deer, native to the area            mittee improperly approved the rezoning of land
of Jerusalem at issue, to the list of petitioners.        that was designated as natural forest for housing
He contended that, as potentially endangered              because the required procedures were not fol-
fauna, the deer had standing. The residents,              lowed., September 7, 2008.
backed by the Society for the Protection of Na-

      neW LegisLation
pennsylvania Dog Breeder Bill signed into Law
Bill is passed in the wake of case where some dog breeders had opted to shoot 80 dogs
rather than pay for mandated veterinary care

Harrisburg, PA - On October 9, 2008,                      breeders to cover the costs of care for their
Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell signed HB                dogs if they are seized in a cruelty case. The
2525 into law after it was overwhelmingly                 law further mandates that only veterinarians
supported on the last day of the 2007-2008                may euthanize dogs. The new measures
legislative session. The law bans wire flooring,          apply to anyone selling more than 60 dogs in
eliminates cage stacking, doubles cage sizes              a year or anyone selling a dog to a pet shop                         volume xI
and mandates exercise, and breeders will                  or wholesaler. It is said that roughly 650 of
be required to provide twice yearly veterinary            the 2,750 licensed kennels in the state meet
exams. The law also increases the enforcement             that standard., October 10,
power given to dog wardens and obliges                    2008.                                                                number      7
                                                                                                                        summer 2009
  Lewis & Clark Law school Creates First-ever Dean position in                                   Frasch as the first assistant dean for
                                                                                                 Animal Law Studies. Frasch also serves
  Field of animal Law and aLDF’s own pamela Frasch is appointed                                  as the Executive Director of the Center
                                                                                                 for Animal Law Studies at Lewis & Clark
                                                                                                 Law School. According to Stephen Wells,
  Portland, OR - Animal legal education       & Clark Law School, has created the                ALDF’s Executive Director, “The first
  has reached a new milestone with the        only dean-level position in the nation             Student Animal Legal Defense Fund
  appointment of the nation’s first dean in   to head up the law school’s animal law             (SALDF) chapter was established in 1992
  the field. Robert Klonoff, Dean of Lewis    program. Klonoff appointed Pamela                  at Lewis & Clark Law School.
                                                                                                                           continueD on PAGe 8

       continueD From PAGe 4

      pRoseCutoR puZZLeR
  Disposition                                 act shall prevent a person or humane
                                              society organization from destroying a pet
                                                                                                 cage stacking, doubles cage sizes, requires
                                                                                                 exercise and twice yearly veterinary exams
                                              animal by means of firearms.                       and requires breeders to cover the costs of
  The Zimmerman case occurred in an                                                              care of their dogs when they are seized in
                                              In Pennsylvania, the Bureau of Dog Law             cruelty cases. Most importantly, to prevent
  area of Pennsylvania known in animal
                                              Enforcement (within the state Department           cases such as this from happening in the
  protection circles as the “Puppy mill       of Agriculture) oversees 59 dog wardens to         future, euthanasia at regulated kennels may
  capital of the world.” Pennsylvania law     enforce the Dog Law, under Pennsylvania            only be performed by a veterinarian.
  allows people to kill their own dogs        Statutes Title 3 Chapter 8. The Bureau’s
  by gunshot. At the time the shooting        duties include: enforcing licensing and            3 P.S. §459-207. Requirements for kennels
  occurred, Pennsylvania statutes read as     control of dogs, inspecting kennels,               (h) (17) Notwithstanding any law, a dog may
                                              investigating dog bites and enforcing the
  follows:                                    Pennsylvania Rabies Law.
                                                                                                 not be euthanized except by a veterinarian.

  18 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. §5511.              In a news report, Jessie Smith, the Bureau’s       The next step: Does your state law allow
  Cruelty to animals                          special deputy secretary, said of the              people to kill their own animals? Are there
                                              shooting “It’s horrible, but it’s legal … If the
  (a) Killing, maiming or poisoning           definition of a puppy mill is putting profits
                                                                                                 legal requirements regulating humane
  domestic animals or zoo animals, etc.       over care of the dogs, this is a stark example     euthanasia? Are there special regulations
  (2.1) (i) A person commits a                of doing that.”                                    for breeders that might provide loopholes
  misdemeanor of the first degree if he       The Zimmermans were not charged with               to the anti-cruelty law?
  willfully and maliciously:                  animal cruelty, but Elmer Zimmerman
                                              pleaded guilty to the four citations previously    Resources: ALDF has resources to help
  (A) Kills, maims, mutilates, tortures
                                              issued for violating the requirements              you make changes to your state’s animal
  or disfigures any dog or cat, whether
                                              for kennels under the Dog Law. They                protection laws. Go to and
  belonging to himself or otherwise….
                                              surrendered their kennel licenses, and to          click “Resources” to find:
  (iii) The killing of a dog or cat by the    prevent them from starting another breeding
  owner of that animal is not malicious if    operation, the dog warden ordered them to          • Model Animal Protection Laws
  it is accomplished in accordance with       destroy the wooden crates in which the dogs
                                                                                                 • Animal Protection Laws of the USA
  the act of December 22, 1983 (P.L.          had lived.
                                                                                                   & Canada
  303, No. 83), referred to as the Animal     The Zimmerman case was considered a
  Destruction Method Authorization Law.                                                          • Contact information for state bar
                                              major factor in the quick passage of a bill
                                                                                                   association animal law sections
                                              to regulate large kennels, i.e. anyone selling
  3 P.S. §328.2 Methods of destruction                                                             or committees
                                              more than 60 dogs in a year or anyone
  of animals
                                              selling a dog to a pet shop or wholesaler.         • Or contact ALDF at for
  (b) Authorized method. —Nothing in this     On October 9, 2008, the governor signed              information on how to start an animal
                                              a bill that bans wire flooring, prohibits            law section or committee.

the anImal law program anImal legal defense fund
 7summer 2009

      a Day in the LiFe at aLDF
As seen through the eyes of Scott Heiser,
Director of ALDF’s criminal Justice Program                                                               the local media
                                                                                                          covered the story
Cotati, CA - Not too long ago, I got a typical
call from a somewhat harried prosecutor. She
                                                      the victim and that the court probably would
                                                      be forced to overrule the state’s objection.
                                                                                                          and reported the
works as the lead attorney in the domestic
violence unit of her office, loves animals and
                                                      Nevertheless, the trial judge set the case
                                                      over for a short period of time to give the very
                                                                                                          court’s ruling as
had heard that ALDF can help busy pros-               busy prosecutor a chance to research the           “groundbreaking.”
ecutors get better results in their cases. In         issue and substantiate her objection.
this situation, she recently secured convic-
tions against a man who had assaulted his             Having heard of ALDF’s Criminal Justice
girlfriend, killed one of her two kittens and         Program, the prosecutor called us for help.
injured the other kitten. The surviving kitten,       We did a fair amount of research for the
Max, was safe (for the time being) in the care        prosecutor and drafted a series of legal
and custody of the local animal shelter. The          arguments for the state to make in support
problem that this prosecutor faced was that           of its objection to returning the “evidence”
the defendant’s girlfriend (and Max’s owner)          to a domestic violence victim who had
had reunited with the defendant and was               resumed living with the very same man who
once again living with him and she wanted             assaulted her, killed one of her cats and
Max back—a not so surprising fact for those           injured the other. I’ll not bore you with the
familiar with the cycle of domestic violence          legal details. Rather, I’m pleased to simply
and the strained logic employed by victims            report that this very busy, yet truly dedicated,
who are seemingly trapped in abusive relationships.   young prosecutor took our research, coupled
                                                      with her own excellent work, and persuaded
The trial court entered an order banning the          the trial judge that his initial assessment of
defendant from possessing animals in the              the case was incorrect and that he did, in
wake of his conviction for killing one of his         fact, have the authority to sustain the state’s
girlfriend’s two kittens, but that prohibition        objection to entering an order compelling the
didn’t apply to the victim, as she wasn’t a           return of the surviving kitten. In fact, Max
formal party to the criminal case against her         was ordered forfeited to the animal shelter,
boyfriend (despite the widespread passage             where the lucky little guy will be adopted
of victims’ rights acts around the country,           out to a loving, nonviolent home. The local
victims have not been elevated to “party              media covered the story and reported the
status” in criminal prosecutions). During             court’s ruling as “groundbreaking.”
an earlier hearing, the prosecutor informed
the court that, given the possession ban              I share this story with you for three reasons:
applicable to the defendant, coupled with             to give our donors and volunteer attorneys
the fact that the defendant and victim (owner         some “day in the life” insight into how
of the surviving cat) were once again living          their generous support of ALDF makes
together, the state would oppose any attempt          a difference for little guys like Max on a
to release the “evidence” (i.e., the surviving        daily basis; to publicly applaud the work of
kitten) back to the victim now that the               Tiffany Wasserburger, Chief Deputy, Family                   volume xI
criminal case was resolved. The trial court           Law Division, Scottsbluff County Attorneys’
noted the state’s objection and quipped that          Office, located in Gering, Nebraska; and to
the court likely didn’t have jurisdiction over        humbly boast that I have a really great job!
                                                                                                                   number     7
   animal legal defense fund
      170 e. cotati avenue
    cotati, california 94931
  phone: 707-795-aldf (2533)

  aldf update is a semi-annual        announCements ContinueD FRom page 6
      publication of aldf’s
      animal law program.        Now, 17 years later, when there are 141      number of milestones in educational and
                                 SALDF chapters at schools across the         clinical opportunities:
         stephen Wells           nation, Lewis & Clark marks another
                                 milestone by appointing long-time ALDF       • Student Animal Legal Defense Fund
       executive Director
                                 attorney Pam Frasch as the first-ever dean   • Animal law journal, Animal Law Review
          joyce tischler         of animal law.” The Center for Animal Law    • Full-time faculty position for an animal
            Founder              Studies works in collaboration with the        law clinic
                                 Animal Legal Defense Fund.
                                                                              • Summer animal law program
        pamela alexander
            editor               “Pamela Frasch’s promotion to Assistant      • Animal law competitions
                                 Dean, and her assumption of duties as a      • International animal law conference
          nicole pallotta        member of the Dean’s senior administrative
         assistant editor        team, are tangible recognition of the        While adding to the list of firsts, Klonoff
                                 relevance of this burgeoning field,” said    said his decision to name Frasch an
         stephanie ulmer
                                 Klonoff. “We are demonstrating our           Assistant Dean benefits the animal law
       senior Legal analyst
                                 commitment to continue developing this       students the most. “As part of the senior
         niemann design          field, pushing it in new directions, and     administrative team, Pamela will have a
         graphic Design          strengthening its presence among legal       unique opportunity to plan for the future
                                 education programs.”                         of our Animal Law Program in the context
                                                                              of the school’s overall strategic plan,
                                 The field of animal law has made huge        budget, and mission,” Klonoff said. “This
volume xI                        strides in recent years, with over 100       opportunity will help ensure that the
                                 law schools now offering an animal law       Animal Law Program remains, as it is now,
                                 course but Lewis & Clark Law School          a central focus of the law school’s growth
                                 has long been seen as instrumental in        and commitment.”
number     7                     its development and growth—setting a

To top