Walter Clark Legal Group files legal action against Riverside County Department of Animal Services and its Director, Erin Gettis, for violations of the Hayden Act which protects animals in shelters

Rancho Mirage, California – A Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief was filed yesterday in Riverside County Superior Court against Riverside County Department of Animal Services (RCDAS), its Director, Erin Gettis, and the County of Riverside. In 2023, Best Friends Animal Society, a nationally respected animal welfare organization with expertise in shelter statistics, stated that RCDAS killed more dogs and cats than any other reporting shelter in the nation. RCDAS killed approximately 24,000 animals in the last two years.

Attorneys Walter T. Clark and Dan C. Bolton represent the Petitioners in the case who, collectively, have devoted over a half-century to animal advocacy, rescue, shelter management and no kill policies.

The purpose of this litigation is to end the inertia, inaction and inhumanity at RCDAS, and to remove the current Director with a proactive, compassionate leader who works with the community and rescue organizations rather than taking the easy approach. As Mr. Bolton states: “Dogs and cats deserve to go out the front door to a new beginning, not the back door to a rendering facility or landfill.”

The provisions of the Hayden Act, enacted over 25 years ago, are codified throughout various Codes and state: “It is the policy of this state that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home.” And, even animals that are not technically “adoptable” should not be euthanized “if they could become adoptable with reasonable efforts.”

The Hayden Act is derided by the Director of RCDAS—who had no previous experience in animal safety, shelter management, or overseeing a $39,000,000 budget before being hired—as “legalese” and chooses to ignore its clear mandate. The disturbing results of this approach are disdain for the health and safety of animals in the custody of RCDAS, disinterest in working with the community and rescue organizations to place animals in homes, inertia in moving to adopt no kill policies, and a haphazard focus on killing, rather than saving, dogs and cats. This must stop.

Mr. Clark notes: “This is a ground-breaking case that seeks to overhaul Riverside County animal services through comprehensive court-ordered relief consistent with the Hayden Act as well as the substantive recommendations of local animal advocates who have fought tirelessly for change.”

To learn more about this case and see the latest coverage, please visit https://walterclark.com/riverside-county-dept-animal-services/

CASE INFORMATION

Superior Court of California, Riverside County
WOODRUFF vs GETTIS
Case Id: CVPS2405127