Sixth Angel Shepherd Rescue Inc. v. Susan West

• Decision Date: 03 May 2011
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 10–3101.
• Citation: 790 F.Supp.2d 339
• Parties: SIXTH ANGEL SHEPHERD RESCUE INC., Plaintiff,v.Susan WEST, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

790 F.Supp.2d 339

SIXTH ANGEL SHEPHERD RESCUE INC., Plaintiff,

v.Susan WEST, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 10–3101.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

May 3, 2011.

Terry E. Silva, Silva Legal Professionals, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiff.

Sue Ann Unger, Office of Attorney General, Philadelphia, PA, Michael P. Laffey, Holsten & Associates, Media, PA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM

SCHILLER, District Judge.

Dog rescue organization Sixth Angel Shepherd Rescue, Inc. (“Sixth Angel”) alleges that state and local officials have harassed its members since the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (“PSPCA”) seized three of its dogs in April 2010. Sixth Angel's Third Amended Complaint alleges constitutional challenges to the Pennsylvania Dog Law, federal civil rights claims, and state-law tort claims. Specifically, Sixth Angel identifies two groups of Defendants: the “Dog Law Defendants” consisting of the Dog Law Bureau, its director Susan West, and Dog Warden Joseph Loughlin; and the “Marcus Hook Defendants,” comprising Marcus Hook Borough, Mayor James Schiliro, and Officer Ricci Pyle. All Defendants have filed motions to dismiss. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant these motions.

I. BACKGROUNDA. The April 10, 2010 Dog Seizure

Sixth Angel is a rescue network kennel licensed in Pennsylvania. (Third Am. Compl. ¶ 1.¹) The organization rescues dogs from southern animal shelters and transports them to the northeast for adoption. ( Id. ¶ 2 1.) On the evening of April 10, 2010, volunteers from Sixth Angel waited for a van of dogs from North Carolina in Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania. ( Id. ¶¶ 17, 26, 36.) The van arrived around 9:00 p.m. ( Id. ¶ 36.) Joseph Loughlin, a dog warden from the Pennsylvania Dog Law Enforcement Bureau (“Dog Law Bureau”), then appeared with uniformed officers. ( Id. ¶¶ 38, 40, 192.) Sixth Angel alleges Loughlin acted at the orders of Susan West, the Dog Law Bureau's Director of Dog Law Enforcement, who “had direct conversations with the representatives at the scene” via telephone. ( Id. ¶¶ 4, 49; see also Pl.'s Resp. to Mot. of Commw. Defs. to Dismiss [Pl.'s Dog Law Resp.] 7 n. 6.)

Loughlin seized documents from the van's driver, Ann Wessel. (Third Am. Compl. ¶¶ 36, 38.) He took the volunteers' car keys and told them they could not leave. ( Id. ¶ 41.) Loughlin also threatened to cite them for violations of the Pennsylvania Dog Law, a statutory scheme regulating dog kennels and the sale and transport of dogs. ( Id.; see 3 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 459–101.) Loughlin did not read anyone their Miranda rights or produce a warrant. (Third Am. Compl. ¶ 42.) He also threatened to arrest Wessel and summoned PSPCA agents to investigate her van. ( Id. ¶¶ 38, 40, 49.)

Loughlin cited Wessel and Thunder's Angels, another Pennsylvania dog rescue organization, for violations of the Pennsylvania Dog Law. ( Id. ¶¶ 45, 56.) Loughlin and PSPCA officials also told Wessel they would confiscate her own dogs if she did not surrender the dogs in the van. ( Id.) Loughlin and the PSPCA officials then threatened the Sixth Angel members at the scene with citations for the poor conditions in which Wessel had transported the dogs, and for Wessel's failure to obtain a Pennsylvania out-of-state dealer license. ( Id. ¶¶ 53, 55.) Wessel had applied for a license, but had not yet received one. ( Id. ¶ 56.) As Loughlin questioned the Sixth Angel volunteers, they were “subject to public ridicule” and “humiliation in Saturday night traffic with local residents and local police mandating Plaintiff's representatives leave the many dogs in cages in the parking lot, walk them, etc.” ( Id. ¶¶ 157, 192.) Sixth Angel alleges the PSPCA questioned and threatened its volunteers because West and Loughlin directed them to do so. ( Id. ¶¶ 49, 53.)

PSPCA Director of Investigations George Bengal first asserted that Sixth Angel itself was operating without PSPCA approval. ( See id. ¶ 59.) When Bengal discovered Sixth Angel was “an approved rescue,” he refused to return Sixth Angel's dogs until a PSPCA veterinarian had examined the dogs. ( Id. ¶ ¶ 48, 59.) Sixth Angel's volunteers waited for the veterinarian until 1:30 a.m. Loughlin told the Sixth Angel members that they could retrieve the organization's dogs from the PSPCA “the following day or the day after” once a veterinarian had seen them. ( See id. ¶ 48.)

B. Sixth Angel's Disputes With the Dog Law Bureau and PSPCA

The documents Loughlin seized from Wessel included bills and receipts memorializing Sixth Angel's ownership of three dogs in the van. ( Id. ¶¶ 17, 26, 50.) Some of these records identified the dogs' owner as Terry Silva, Sixth Angel's founder and counsel in this action. ( See id. ¶¶ 8, 28 n. 4.) Despite this evidence that Sixth Angel and/or Silva owned the dogs, “Defendants came up with various excuses to delay and play along with one another” rather than return the dogs. ( Id. ¶ 62.) A PSPCA representative finally told Sixth Angel that it intended to offer the dogs for adoption. ( Id.)

On April 14 and April 15, 2010, Sixth Angel informed Defendants that it would file a lawsuit seeking return of its dogs. ( Id. ¶ 63.) Sixth Angel and Silva then filed a lawsuit in this Court on April 16, 2010, alleging that the PSPCA's retention of the dogs was unconstitutional and constituted conversion. Sixth Angel Shepherd Rescue, Inc. v. Bengal, et al., Civ. A. No. 10–1733, 2010 WL 2164521, at *1 (E.D.Pa. May 27, 2010) ( “Sixth Angel I” ). Sixth Angel established ownership of the dogs and the Court therefore ordered their return. Id. at *4–5. The PSPCA returned Sixth Angel's dogs on June 11, 2010. (Third Am. Compl. ¶ 32 n. 6.) Sixth Angel I is now stayed pending resolution of the PSPCA's appeal.

Sixth Angel alleges that its lawsuit caused the Dog Law Bureau and PSPCA to retaliate against it. ( Id. ¶ 166.) First, Silva received a citation from Loughlin on April 26, 2010, accusing her of buying and paying for the transfer of dogs with respect to the April 10 incident. ( Id. ¶¶ 64–65.) The citation, dated April 10, 2010, states that “Defendant [Terry Silva] did pay for transfer of dogs at above location,” referencing the street address where Loughlin encountered Silva. ( Id. Ex. 2 [Dog Law Citation].) The Dog Law Bureau withdrew the citation on September 20, 2010. ( See Third Am. Compl. ¶¶ 43, 118.) However, Sixth Angel claims this citation “still looms as to Plaintiff's activities.” ( Id. ¶ 118.) Silva has yet to receive a refund of the fee she paid to respond to the citation in pleading not guilty. ( Id. ¶ 43.)

In addition, Sixth Angel alleges the Dog Law Bureau ignored the evidence it seized from Wessel. ( Id. ¶ 70.) These documents allegedly demonstrated Sixth Angel owned the dogs in Wessel's van before they arrived in Marcus Hook. ( Id.) The organization attributes this to the Dog Law Bureau's failure to “create policies mandating investigation, review of documents and prompt property return in violation of the United States Constitution.” ( Id. ¶ 72.) Sixth Angel also alleges that the Dog Law Bureau and PSPCA knew all along that Sixth Angel was not “buying” dogs on April 10, 2010 because Defendants “said as much at the time of the seizure.” ( Id. ¶ 87.)

Sixth Angel identifies other instances of Dog Law Bureau and PSPCA harassment. The Dog Law Bureau and PSPCA removed Sixth Angel's designation as an “approved” rescue organization on the PSPCA and Delaware County SPCA registries “without notice or explanation.” ( Id. ¶ 60.) The Delaware County SPCA meanwhile singled out Sixth Angel for investigation. ( See id. ¶ 66.)

West and the Dog Law Bureau also issued statements regarding the April 10 seizure of Sixth Angel's dogs. Sixth Angel alleges these communications “defamed and blamed the rescues including Plaintiff for the conditions of the transport and further falsely stated that the rescues present were ‘buying’ dogs and were not allowed to use paid transports.” ( Id. ¶ 162.) Sixth Angel has provided a copy of an e-mail from West dated April 14, 2010, in which West responds to a request for “clarification” regarding an “article/blog” about the seizure:

The rescue had dogs in a van with poor ventilation, one crate didn't have a bottom on it and so the urine from that dog had no place to go but down, the crates were stacked on top of one another and crates did not have adequate space for the number of dogs in each one, some were very dirty ... I hope you get the picture. There were dogs without health certificates and money exchanged hands (a sale in a public place is illegal).

We have nothing against rescues, and are happy to see people helping dogs. But there is a right and a wrong way to do things. We are required to enforce the dog law. If dogs are not housed correctly, that is bad for a dog regardless of whether the person is a rescue or a commercial kennel.

( Id. Ex. 1 [West e-mail].) Sixth Angel alleges West, Loughlin and the Dog Law Bureau circulated “other such defamatory and disparaging statements without correction.” ( Id. ¶¶ 75, 183.)C. Sixth Angel's Disputes With Marcus Hook

Sixth Angel claims the PSPCA and Dog Law Bureau meanwhile coordinated with authorities in Marcus Hook to harass Silva and Sixth Angel's volunteers. ( Id. ¶¶ 14, 88.) Silva lives and works in Marcus Hook, where she maintains Sixth Angel's office and a network of foster homes for its rescued dogs. ( See id. ¶¶ 9, 127–28.) Silva is also involved in a property rental business in the area. ( Id. ¶ 108.) Since April 10, 2010, Sixth Angel claims Marcus Hook officials have focused their attention on its employees and volunteers, particularly Silva. ( See, e.g., id. ¶¶ 9, 92, 95.)

The pattern of harassment Sixth Angel describes includes accusations that Marcus Hook officials: (1) issued Sixth Angel groundless citations for loose dogs and failure to remove dog feces; (2) maintained a “stake out” of Sixth Angel's office; (3) issued zoning citations intended to...