About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1985 Animal Legal Def. Fund Newsl. [i] (1985)

handle is hein.animal/aniad1985 and id is 1 raw text is: ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND No. newsletter 1985 1984 - The Year In Review 1984 has been a busy and productive year for ALDF. Our change of name from Attorneys For Animal Rights to the Animal Legal Defense Fund is symbolic of the growth and change that this organization is experiencing. During 1984, the Board of Directors worked vigorously to develop new, long range objectives and programs for this expanding group. The direction that Attorneys For Animal Rights had when it began as a small discussion group in San Francisco has had to be redefined to meet the needs and demands of the animal movement and the increasingly important role that attorneys are playing in this movement. When one con- siders that almost all of the attorneys and law students ac- ting on behalf of ALDF are volunteers, working during their nonbusiness hours, the list of activities becomes all the more impressive. With one foot already in 1985, let us take a look back at the events of 1984. Litigation Filed in 1984 MOL v. Bangladesh (Importation of Primates) This case, which we first reported about in our Fall 1983 ewsletter, reached a happy conclusion in late 1984, due argely to the efforts of attorney, Larry Silver. MOL, an Oregon corporation, had entered into a contract with the government of Bangladesh, in which Bangladesh agreed to export 71,500 monkeys to the United States, to be used for research. Bangladesh terminated the contract, and MOL sued the Bangladesh government in the U.S. District Court, Oregon, for $15 million in damages. Throughout the course of the litigation, Bangladesh did not file pleadings, and was not represented by an attorney. To remedy this, ALDF filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, and the U.S. District Court, citing ALDF's brief, dismissed the lawsuit. MOL appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals; ALDF filed a se- cond amicus curiae brief, and the District Court's ruling was upheld. MOL appealed this decision to the United States Supreme Court, where ALDF filed a third arnicus curiae brief late in 1984. The Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, bringing the lawsuit to an end. As a result of ALDF's in- tervention, 71,500 monkeys are free to live out their natural lives in their native land. Animal Protection Institute, Humane Society of The U.S. v. Clark (Protection of Wildlife) On behalf of animal welfare organizations, ALDF has filed a challenge to the annual elk hunt conducted at the Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming, alleging violations of the Grand Teton National Park Act and the National En- vironmental Policy Act. While the 1984 hunt could not be halted, this lawsuit marks an important first step in challenging out-of-date concepts of wildlife managmnent. nd progress has already bqen made to force the govern- ent to meet its obligations under federal law to manage e elk herds for their own protection and conservation. Marina Admiralty Co. v. Guilford (Pets In Housing) In late 1983, a Los Angeles area attorney was evicted from his apartment solely due to his possession of a dog. His lease contained a blanket prohibition against the keep- ing of pets, a problem which affects thousands of people and animals. ALDF has filed amicus curiae briefs at the trial and appellate level, arguing that tenants with pets con- stitute a class of individuals which is subjected to discrimination based on the possession of a companion animal, rather than on the individual characteristics of the owner and pet. Such discrimination is arbitrary and capricious and in violation of the law. Additionally, ALDF is assisting the tenant in raising the funds necessary to pur- sue all avenues of appeal and establish the rights of tenants to live peaceably with their pets. Megalopolis v. Buvron (Pets in Housing) Our New York chapter, which had assisted in drafting the new pets-in-housing law in that city (see, Winter 1984 Newsletter) has continued to defend the first several cases which will test the constitutionality of that law. Peninsula Humane Society v. Walters (Animals In Research) As reported in the Fall 1984 Newsletter, during 1983, a white Samoyed dog was found, in miserable condition, in a fifth floor laboratory at the U.S. Veterans Administration Hospital in Palo Alto, California. Three humane societies in- vestigated the incident and urged the relevant local and federal authorities to take action. After a full year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.) had still not completed an investigation and the local prosecutor refused to bring cruelty charges. In the spring of 1984, ALDF attorneys filed suit on behalf of the humane societies against the Veterans Administration, Stanford University, the U.S.D.A. and the in- dividual researcher in charge of the project. Approximately six months later, the U.S.D.A. completed its investigation, confirming the serious nature of the injury to the dog and indicating that the V.A. Hospital had taken steps to prevent the recurrence of such an incident. In early 1985, the U.S. District Court dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the plaintiff humane societies lacked standing and that the case was moot. The Court's decision points out the difficulty of establishing the requisite standing to sue of plaintiffs who do not own or have a direct relation to research animals, even though, as in the case of humane societies, their very reason for existence is for the protec- tion of animals. In Re: The Little Bookcliffs Wild Horse Range (Wild Horses) Since late 1983, ALDF has pursued its appeal of a deci- sion by the Bureau of Land Management to allow oil and gas development in the Little Bookcliffs Wilderness Area and Wildhorse Range in Grand Junction, Colorado. The Wild Horse Range is one of only three formally dedicated wild horse ranges in the United States. Working with the Sierra Club, the Colorado Open Space Council and the Animal Pro- tection institute, we have alleged that an environmental assessment prepared by the BLM is inadequate and a full environmental impact statement is needed. Other Legal Work During 1984, the ALDF national office, and the New York, Washington, D.C., Boston and Los Angeles chapters received literally hundreds of requests for legal advice, in- formation, referrals to attorneys and other assistance. In Cont' on back page

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most