Join the Crusade Against H$U$ Anti Pet laws, Pass it Forward to Everyone!
The good news: The HSUS case filed against Petland and the Hunte Corporation in AZ Federal District Court, has been dismissed in its entirety, on two motions by Hunte and Petland based on failure to state a cause of action, 12(b)(6) + 9(b). [2010 note; hsus refiled and about 29 of 31 allegations were still thrown out, leaving TWO counts at best v Petland; Hunt was dismissed.]
This is the well-known HSUS insired case claiming that Petland and the Hunte Corp conspired to defraud customers, claiming puppy “milled”, yet HSUS Plaintiffs failed to carry their burden in the initial pleadings, failed to use specificity for fraud, and failed to basically show the court that there was a case. HSUS tried to allege RICO statute, which was blown out by failure to specify the facts needed, but instead may have attempted to be a discovery fishing expedition. [discovery being the legal procedure used to fish out whatever facts you are looking to get]
The court did allow the HSUS people to file an amended complaint [if they have the guts to do so] by 08/29/09, but the amendments would have to be fairly specific with the allegations. The Plaintiffs requested additional briefing time and have decided to delay the agony further by filing an amended complaint which we should be able to read tomorrow (09/11/09)………
Petdefense suspects that HSUS might not want to suffer another blow by losing an amended complaint in Federal court. HSUS purposely did not put HSUS as a named Plaintiff in the case for strategy reasons, and they are not claiming they are an asociation attempting to represent the Plaintiff (even though they are doing that in reality, behind the scenes.)
Nevertheless, with all the publicity HSUS has pushed re commercial breeders, and the exhausting investigations they alleged, one would think that HSUS could come into court and at least survive a motion to dismiss. They did not. Not as of now. Petdefense thinks that at trial, HSUS Plaintiffs would not be able to carry their burden of proof. But Gina Spadifori of pet connection blog, wants to eliminate bad ole’ commercial breeders. Get a life SPAD. Pet owners siding with HSUS can only mean several things, neither of which are any good.
In any event, Petdefense has already notified the CA legislature of the dismissal of the complaint by HSUS plaintiffs, in regard to alleged ‘puppy milled’ sales. Petdefense has always said that owners should take the Petland side, because to do otherwise is to support HSUS. Supporting HSUS is cutting your own throat. HSUS USES commercial kennels to get owners ON their side, while going behind their backs making horrific laws, like in CA and other states.
Unlike Gina Spadifori, of pet connection blog, who keeps claiming that those of us who tell the truth about HSUS are “haters” but that she is an ethical breeder, we can safely say, she is a dummy as to her knowledge (lack of it) re HSUS, or/she is a paid shill for HSUS type groups, and can’t see the forest for the trees. People like SPAD only harm the animal owners of the USA. Spad also hates production farming and the methods used. So it’s ok for her to hate it, but we are supposed to love HSUS killing, seizing, using illegal methods, pushing others to do their dirty work, getting people convicted of abuse to serve 102 years in prison?
Yes, that is true, 102 years in jail on dogfight charges, (alabama, 2007) but attempted murder could be 7 years. That is the kind of laws HSUS pushes. The kind you love to hate. The kind that claims “abuse, abuse, abuse, abuse, abuse” at every doorstep. Until they start taking dogs from people with 2 dogs, some people just WON’T GET IT.