Abuse at Los Angeles Zoo
Leider v. Lewis
The Animal Legal Defense Fund filed two amicus briefs in support of a lawsuit brought by a Los Angeles resident and taxpayer to end the abuse of three elephants at the Los Angeles Zoo.
May 25, 2017
In 2007, Los Angeles resident and taxpayer Aaron Leider sued the City of Los Angeles and the director of the Los Angeles Zoo to end the abuse of three of the zoo’s elephants. Billy, Tina, and Jewel were held captive at the Los Angeles Zoo’s controversial and cruel “Elephants of Asia” exhibit. Leider argued that the poor conditions in which they were kept caused the elephants both physical and mental harm, and violated the state’s criminal animal cruelty laws.
In 2012, the trial court issued an order enjoining the zoo from using some especially cruel behavioral tools like bullhooks and electric shocks, and mandated that the elephants be given at least two hours of exercise every day on soft ground to protect their feet and joints. The court did not, however, order the elephants to be moved to a sanctuary.
Both sides of the case appealed the order. The Animal Legal Defense Fund filed an amicus brief urging the appellate to properly apply the language of animal cruelty statutes provide the elephants with adequate relief. The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s ruling in 2016.
In 2016, the City of Los Angeles and director of the Los Angeles Zoo sought and obtained review of the case by the Supreme Court of California. The Animal Legal Defense Fund again filed an amicus brief on behalf of the taxpayers and elephants to preserve their victory.
In 2017, the Supreme Court of California reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision on procedural grounds—that taxpayer lawsuits could not be used to enforce criminal laws like animal cruelty laws—and not on the case’s merits.
Animal Advocates Urge USDA to Withhold License from Troubled Puerto Rico Zoo
Animal Advocates Urge USDA to Withhold License from Troubled Puerto Rico ZooIn a letter to the USDA, the Animal Legal Defense Fund and others explain the zoo has repeatedly violated standards of the Animal Welfare ActJune 2, 2021 Press Release
Madras High Court Uses Child Custody Approach to Resolve Dispute Over Legal Ownership of ElephantIn October 2020, the Madras High Court in India resolved an “ownership” dispute involving an elephant named Lalitha using the “best interests” standard used in child custody cases.March 18, 2021 Animal Law Update
After Groundbreaking Animal Rights Ruling, Islamabad High Court Continues to Affirm Original DecisionIn the months following a groundbreaking decision from the Islamabad High Court in Pakistan that animals have legal and natural rights, Chief Justice Athar Minallah issued three subsequent orders, each affirming the court’s original ruling and expressing continued interest in the animals’ well-being.February 19, 2021 Animal Law Update
Seek Permit Revocation of Puerto Rico Zoo
Request for Permit Revocation and Relocation of Animals at Dr. Juan A. Rivero National Zoological Park Under Puerto Rico’s Exotic Animals Laws
Lucky the Lonely Elephant
Graham v. San Antonio Zoological Society
Opposing International Wildlife Conservation Council
Animal Legal Defense Fund submitted an objection letter.
Looking for case and legal resources? View ResourcesSee More
Say No to Roadside Zoos
Bears, lions, and other animals languish in roadside zoos across the country. Animals live in cruel conditions, confined to small cages without the enrichment they need to lead full, happy lives. Protect animals by boycotting roadside zoos.