Lawsuit BAH

UPDATE: Minnesota Court of Appeals dismisses lawsuit against Minnesota Board of Animal Health

Issues of animal cruelty were not addressed

On June 27, 2017, Animal Folks, in conjunction with the Animal Humane Society (AHS) and two taxpayers of Cass County, sued the Minnesota Board of Animal Health for violation of the Commercial Breeders Licensing and Enforcement law, known as the commercial breeder law. (Standing granted to AHS, who had incurred over $200,000 in the seizure and care of the animals.)

The Board had issued a state license to dog breeder Deborah Rowell of Cass County, who had been convicted of Minn. Stat. sec. 346.39, subd. 4 (lack of shelter and shade), which Animal Folks and its partners consider animal cruelty. Animal Folks had filed multiple complaints against Rowell resulting in the investigation and seizure of more than 120 dogs and puppies from her kennel, Country Pride Kennel. The animals were seized, cared for, and re-homed by the Animal Humane Society at great expense. Click for case details.

Direct conflict with breeder law

Granting a state license to this breeder is in conflict with the commercial breeder law (Minn. Stat. sec. 347.58 subd. 1) that states the Board must refuse to issue an initial license when a commercial breeder "has been convicted, other than a petty misdemeanor conviction, of cruelty to animals under Minnesota law."

The lawsuit sought an order that would make the Board revoke the license issued to this breeder, arguing that the 2017 license renewal was based on the 2015 initial-license determination — and that lack of shelter and shade resulted in pain and suffering for the animals.

In a judgment filed May 7, 2018, the Minnesota Court of Appeals dismissed the lawsuit stating it was time-barred because any action should have been filed within 60 days of due notice of the license being issued.

Case highlights key problems

This case has brought to light some aspects of the law that make it difficult for the public to take action on behalf of animals.

Specifically, data about commercial dog and cat breeders (collected and maintained by the Board of Animal Health) is classified as private and nonpublic. Without access to licensing applications and dates and kennel owner names, it is next to impossible to know when a breeder obtains a lcense in order to meet the 60 day period.

Further, because the lawsuit was dismissed on procedural grounds, the court did not address the primary issue of animal cruelty. The reason for filing the lawsuit was to address how the Board of Animal Health interprets animal cruelty and interprets and enforces the commercial dog and cat breeder law. Animal Folks with the Animal Humane Society had submitted letters to and met with the Board multiple times over the course of a year, in the hopes that the Board would reverse its licensing decision. The Board chose not to do so and the breeder continues to operate.

Critical questions unanswered

Critical questions remain unresolved. Why did the Board issue this dog breeder a license, even though there was ample evidence from the criminal case showing cruelty? How does the Board interpret and report "animal cruelty"?

As stated in the court opinion: "The board's inspector contacted the county attorney's office that had prosecuted Rowell, and was in turn directed to the county court administration for copies of the complaint and conviction, and to the county sheriff's office [f]or copies of the investigative files, including photos of the conditions in which the animals were kept. The board obtained copies of the 2013 criminal complaint and conviction, but there is no indication that it reviewed or attempted to obtain the sheriff's office's investigative files."

This case also highlights the need for greater transparency of data. As stated, data relating to the commercial breeder law is classified as private. In addition to licensing information, data such as inspection reports, enforcement actions, kennel size, and other information relative to the health and safety of the animals is not currently available to the public. Animal Folks believes this data must be made available to the public.

Need for effective enforcement of law

Animal Folks is disappointed with the court's decision and remain deeply concerned about the enforcement of the commercial dog and cat breeder law.

"This is about the welfare and safety of animals and the enforcement of law," says Ann Olson, Executive Director of Animal Folks. "The breeder law was passed to protect dogs and cats in breeding facilities. But for protection to work, the law must be properly enforced — the intent of the law must be followed."

Animal Folks will continue to work on improving enforcement efforts and data transparency to better protect animals.

The plaintiffs were represented pro bono by Robins Kaplan LLP.

WHAT SHOULD CHANGE?

1. TRANSPARENCY. The public has a right to know who is being licensed to commercially breed dogs and cats, when licenses are renewed, and the results of inspections.

The public, including consumers, need to have access to breeder information so they can make responsible and well-informed decisions before purchasing a companion animal and so they can advocate for the proper treatment of animals.

2. INVESTIGATIONS: The Board of Animal Health should thoroughly review all past complaints and investigations against a dog or cat breeder before issuing or renewing a license.

If there is evidence of animal cruelty, a breeder's license must not be issued or renewed. The Board of Animal Health must institute policies and processes that allow for a thorough review of all criminal cases pertaining to potential licensees; most importantly, these processes must reflect an understanding of companion animal health.

3. TRAINING: All authorities, including prosecutors, law enforcement, veterinarians, judges, and others tasked with the duty of enforcing law, need ongoing training on animal cruelty and Minnesota animal law.

Animal cruelty is a serious crime. It is important that all authorities involved in the enforcement of criminal law, as well as civil law, are skilled, vigilant, and prompt to ensure that laws are properly enforced and animals are protected. All entities should engage in training to better understand what constitutes cruelty and what protocols are needed to prevent cruelty.

To address the above, a bill has been introduced at the Minnesota Legislature to establish a Companion Animal Board (CAB). The dog and cat breeder bill as well as the kennel and dealer law (licensing animal shelters) will be transferred from the Board of Animal Health to the Companion Animal Board. The CAB's mission and staff will be 100% dedicated to companion animal issues, providing necessary expertise and skills with companion animal health and well-being.

Sign the petition in support of the Companion Animal Board bill.

Below is one photo from the Rowell investigation conducted by the sheriff's office. For additional photos, documents, and summation of the Deborah Rowell criminal and civil case, go to: Breeder: Rowell

Animal Folks is devoted to systemic change. By partnering with authorities and other community members, Animal Folks is working to build a modern animal law enforcement system in Minnesota for the prevention of animal cruelty and improved enforcement of animal anti-cruelty laws.