Los Angeles Animal Services

This is an update on the final decision of the department regarding a dog (Stu) owned by Jeffrey DeLaRosa that was the subject of the DANGEROUS ANIMAL CASE NO. 05331NC

The dog licensed to Jeffrey DeLaRosa (License Number L06-059293, “Stu”) was impounded by officers of LA Animal Services as a potentially dangerous dog, in accordance with Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) 53.34.2(a), after attacking and severely biting a person, which caused permanent disfiguring injuries.

Subsequently, an administrative hearing process was conducted in conformance with LAMC 53.18.5, and based upon evidence presented at the hearing, a Notice of Order was signed by the General Manager, Department of Animal Services, to Mr. DeLaRosa on December 8, 2005. This Notice of Order declared the animal dangerous as defined by LAMC 53.34.4(b) and ordered the animal humanely destroyed as required in LAMC 53.34.4(d)3.

Mr. DeLaRosa filed an appeal to the Notice of Order within the proscribed number of days for filing and his appeal was heard by the Board of Animal Services Commissioners, as provided by the LAMC. The appeal was heard on March 8, 2006. The Board upheld the decision of the General Manager.

A Notification of Euthanasia letter was delivered to Mr. DeLaRosa on June 8, 2006, stating the Department’s intent to conform to the requirements of LAMC 53.34.4(d)3 within a week. The Department voluntarily abated this action temporarily at the request of Mr. DeLaRosa’s insurance carrier, so that the insurance company’s counsel could gather evidence in regard to a claim by the injured victim. Mr. DeLaRosa’s insurance company counsel was accommodated in that the Department allowed the company to conduct of a behavioral assessment of the animal by an outside consultant engaged by the insurer or their counsel.

A petition for Writ of Mandate to halt the Notice of Euthanasia was filed in Superior Court by an attorney representing Mr. DeLaRosa, but the petition was denied.

Mr. DeLaRosa is currently still in court challenging the Department. However, as the court denied the Writ, the Department has no legal alternatives except to uphold City laws. The decisions made in conformance with LAMC 53.53.34.4(b) and LAMC 53.34.4(d)3 must be carried out as required by law.

In summary, Mr. DeLaRosa initially violated a Notice of Order issued by the General Manager of Animal Services on April 20, 2005. This notice was the result of the Dangerous Animal Hearing Case Number 0521NC. Mr. DeLaRosa carelessly and recklessly violated this order in that he:

· Allowed his dog “Maeve” to be maintained at a location other than his residence.

· As a result of “Maeve” being at Mr. DeLaRosa’s business address, “Maeve” was in a position to engage in a fight with the dog “Stu”, which resulted in “Stu” being injured.

· Allowed his dog “Maeve” to be in the custody and care of someone other than himself, a licensed veterinarian or a licensed kennel facility.

· Did not immediately notify the District Manager, North Central Animal Care Center of the relocation of the dog “Maeve” within the City of Los Angeles.

· Did not immediately notify the District Manager, North Central Animal Care Center of the attack, bite or injury to another dog, namely “Stu”.

These violations resulted in Stu” being injured which directly led to the unfortunate and serious attack upon and injuries to the victim.
The general consensus of all involved in investigating the attack on the victim is that the attack was the direct result of Mr. DeLaRosa’s irresponsible actions and his total disregard to the Order of Issue of the General Manager of LA Animal Services.
At this time, LA Animal Services has no legal alternative to euthanizing this dog except as directed by order of a court. Despite Mr. DeLaRosa’s best attempts, no judge has granted such an order.
During the past several months, Animal Services made arrangements to board Stu in a Sanctuary while looking for a non-lethal remedy to the situation. Unfortunately, Mr. DeLaRosa’s actions made even this arrangement untenable.
It is truly unfortunate that Stu has to suffer the consequences of Mr. DeLaRosa’s cavalier and irresponsible handling of this situation, but when left in the irresponsible care of Mr. DeLaRosa, Stu has clearly demonstrated on more than one occasion that he is a dangerous dog.
Given LA Animal Services “no-kill” goal and “reverence for life” philosophy, I am generating a report to the LA Animal Services Commission suggesting new legislation that will provide the General Manager and/or the Commission greater discretion in future cases involving irresponsible pet owners.