We have been working to find attorneys for California cases so we can work on more bad seizure cases– because they are horrendously expensive if you must sue the government, we prefer cases where we don’t need to sue necessarily the government entities, but the private HUMANE GROUPS that often rip off owners, and end up getting away with it.
*NOTE: We are not interested in Plaintiff cases against vets, groomers, breeders, owners, farmers, or other businesses that sell animals, display animals, have shows with animals, lease animals, or train animal actors, or sporting dogs; 4h people, show dog people, anyone who owns a pet store (unless they were raided, targeted by activists,,,then yes), animal rescue groups (unless they sold you a dangerous animal and lied about it, or other fraud). Our interest lies mostly in defending owners/businesses from the tyranny of the AR activist non profit groups and errant wanna be police groups (like private Humane Groups–they are all non profits usually.) This can be a Plaintiff or Defense case, depending on the individual case.
It is possible that this [state]code below, CCP1021.5 for attorney fee awards, can be used against errant shelters/rescues run by private groups which hold the contract for animal control. Since San Diego is planning to try and outsource all of their animal control in its entirety, that would mean that many private “non profits” will rush to BE THE ANIMAL CONTROL PEOPLE. This will become a nightmare, we already know it, since San Diego is seizure crazy (recall that the Humane Society in San Diego has millions….and they have the strike team for seizures.) They also adopt out dog[s] that have killed babies/or kids?
Most attorneys who can be fairly good at animal law cases are criminal defense counsel already. It will not be difficult to gain a roster of such attorneys, especially younger attorneys who are not animal rights people. Amazingly, under the CA Penal Code 597 et seq, most attorneys have never even read the law. And, many of the alternatives include both misdemeanor/felony– so if animal control hates you, they just pick felony!!
While we could use a few attorneys that are fairly good writers, it is more important to have attorneys that truly care about the justice system, and can argue persuasively. The writing done is usually not the breaking point, but the arguments– especially the oral arguments, must be very good. Our past experience tends to show that some of the best writers are not necessarily good at arguing cases.
CA State law provides that cases which will produce a public benefit may also provide payment of the legal fees under CCP 1021.5 (private atty general):
“Upon motion, a court may award attorneys’ fees to a successful party against one or more opposing parties in any action which has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest if: (a) a significant benefit, whether pecuniary or non pecuniary, has been conferred on the general public or a large class of persons, (b) the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement, or of enforcement by one public entity against another public entity, are such as to make the award appropriate, and (c) such fees should not in the interest of justice be paid out of the recovery, if any. …….With respect to actions involving public entities, this section applies to allowances against, but not in favor of, public entities, and no claim shall be required to be filed therefor, unless one or more successful parties and one or more opposing parties are public entities, in which case no claim shall be required to be filed therefor under Part 3 (commencing with Section 900) of Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code.”
//NOTE:suing ANY governmental entity usually requires that a tort claim be filed..there are NUMEROUS exceptions, including some re 1983 claims……..Tort-Claims-Article-REVISED [this is not legal advice and we did not write it, but although written years ago, much of it is still current]
Attorneys’ fees awarded to a public entity pursuant to this section shall not be increased or decreased by a multiplier based upon extrinsic circumstances, as discussed in Serrano v. Priest, 20 Cal.3d 25, 49 – See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/code-of-civil-procedure/ccp-sect-1021-5.html#sthash.4OUxVmxz.dpuf
Section 42USC 1983 is a remedial statute authorizing a civil action against defendants who act under color of state law and violate rights otherwise secured under federal law. Thus, there is no such thing as a section 1983 violation, absent a deprivation of a right secured under another law. Therefore, to be successful, a section 1983 claimant must identify the federally protected right that has been violated.
To state a cause of action under section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) challenged conduct by a person acting under color of law and (2) challenged conduct that deprived the plaintiff of a federal right. To prevail under section 1983, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s unconstitutional action was the “cause in fact” of the plaintiff’s injury. Under the statute, plaintiffs may hold individual state actors liable for violating their constitutional rights. Although the “state” itself is not a person that may be sued under section 1983, a municipality is a proper defendant, where the conduct complained of relates to an official municipal policy, custom, or practice causing the constitutional tort.
The above mentioned 1983 claims are usually done in Federal court, and usually involve suing the governmental entities or state actors. These entities have unlimited legal funds in most cases, and can drag cases out for years. Litigation is not cheap, and many clients simply won’t be able to afford the fees/costs. Also, sometimes the attorneys fees alone will EXCEED the payout gained by the lawsuit!!
Actually Obtaining the “Damages” Award…
If a Humane Group has insurance, but it won’t cover the damages, then that group might just file bankruptcy if they are able to do so. Individuals might also do the same, so the recovery could be damaged if the Plaintiffs could not find a bankruptcy exception to salvage the judgment. Because we have experience in bankruptcy cases, we are fairly certain that we could size up the facts. Usually a county or city will not be in bankruptcy, but it is not unknown to happen.
We have worked to take down errant non profits in the past using a tandem effort. We obtain free services from people who are willing to help us keep an eye on certain groups. One does not need a large group to do this. Very few people have worked tirelessly to stop AR and humane group illegal actions. We have access to USDA vet, animal husbandry experts (including ones that testified in published cases), humane officers (yes, they all graduated from the HO school/passed), equine professionals, dog professionals, cat professionals/show experts, well established breeders with show dog experience/cat show experience, animal actor training people, behaviorists (including necropsy and aggression issues)………we are also interested in experts involved in farming methods, the care/upkeep of larger kenneling areas/kennels, and large animal care.
The time has come to get people together, and we are doing plenty. We have won victories in various cities/counties, including, Hollywood, San Diego, Shasta, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Mateo, Toledo Ohio…
You will see that having this site for nearly 9 years, was not done in vain!!!! TELL YOUR FRIENDS ON FACEBOOK, ETC.!!!!