City ruling pounds pet shelter’s policy
City ruling pounds pet shelter’s policy

Comments 0

By Michael McNutt

Published: November 22, 2007

Courts: Pit bull terrier adoptions were not allowed

Oklahoma City’s policy of not allowing pit bull terriers to be adopted from its animal shelter violates state law, an appellate court ruled Wednesday.

State law bans “breed specific” regulation of dangerous dogs by a municipality, the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals ruled in finding the city’s policy to be breed-specific and as a result unenforceable.

“The plain meaning of the statute forbids City from regulating potentially dangerous or dangerous dogs by breed,” the ruling states. “The Policy adopted by City’s Animal Welfare Superintendent does just that. Therefore, the Policy is in conflict with the statute and must fail.”

The ruling reverses an earlier decision in support of the city and sends the matter back to Oklahoma County District Court Judge Vicki Robertson for further proceedings.

The appellate court ruling provides a glimmer of hope that adoption could be a possibility for pit bull terriers in the city’s animal shelter, but it’s too late to help the dog that was the center of the case. It was euthanized.

The pit bull terriers in the city’s animal shelter will meet the same fate unless the city changes its policy as a result of the appellate court ruling or if the district judge issues a ruling that states the city’s policy violates state law.

Karen L. Lewis brought the action against the city in 2006 after she noticed her neighbor’s dog, a female black-andwhite pit bull terrier, had been left chained to a tree without food or water.

She called the city’s animal welfare division, which picked up the dog. Lewis tried to adopt the dog, but was told she couldn’t because the city’s policy is to euthanize all unclaimed pit bull terriers.

Lewis then filed for an injunction to stop the city from euthanizing the dog and to allow her to adopt the dog. She said she suffered from depression, and unless the injunction was granted she would be haunted by thoughts that her actions led to the dog’s death. In addition, the dog would provide her with love and affection, possibly easing her depression, according to the appellate court ruling.

Robertson denied the petition for an injunction, saying the city has the right to determine which animals within its control or custody may be adopted. The dog was euthanized.

What’s next?

Wednesday’s ruling only addressed Lewis’ request for an injunction against the city. In order to strike down the animal shelter’s rule on pit bull terriers, it’s up to Lewis to file a new proceeding before Robertson.

“We really won’t know what’s going to happen until the judge rules on it,” said Assistant Municipal Counselor Rita Douglas-Talley.

Douglas-Talley said the animal shelter’s adoption policy that states pit bull terriers are not suitable for adoption is not breed specific.

“We didn’t say this was a dangerous or a potentially dangerous pit bull so you can’t be adopted,” she said. “We just said we get to by statute decide what our adoption polices are going to be and we decided that we would not adopt out pit bulls.”

Lewis Berkowitz, who represented Lewis in the appellate court filing, had not seen the court ruling and had not talked to her Wednesday, he said.

Berkowitz said the city may change the policy before the matter is heard again in district court.

“Government officials are not always unreasonable,” he said. “They don’t always have to be forced to make changes.”

Jon Gary, unit operations supervisor for the city’s animal welfare division, said the rule banning pit bull terriers from being adopted has been in effect for about two years.

Oklahoma City has no ordinance banning pit bull terriers by labeling them dangerous breeds.