Challenging the Treatment of Animals at Special Memories Zoo

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of the Animal Legal Defense Fund to award attorney’s fees from Special Memories Zoo, a now-defunct zoo in eastern Wisconsin.

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin permanently banned Special Memories Zoo, its owner, and manager from ever possessing or exhibiting animals — other than the dogs kept as their “personal pets” — again or working with any business that does so.

District Judge William C. Griesbach rules in favor of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, allowing the case to proceed and permitting discovery to occur.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund asks the Outagamie County, Wisconsin, district attorney to reconsider a decision not to bring animal cruelty charges in response to the deaths of approximately 18 animals who were found dead, apparently from neglect, on the zoo owners’ property in March.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund responds to Special Memories Zoo’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the case should continue because the zoo has not proven that it no longer holds an “ownership” stake in the animals who were transferred to other facilities or shown that the abuse will not recur; that the zoo is still liable under law for any future harm that may befall the animals; that the Animal Legal Defense Fund’s request for the animals to be transferred to reputable sanctuaries remains viable; and that the Animal Legal Defense Fund is still entitled to discovery in the case.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund asks the court to order the zoo to preserve evidence, citing the public’s interest in ensuring the well-being of the animals, and the Animal Legal Defense Fund’s right to conduct discovery in this ongoing legal matter. Meanwhile, Special Memories Zoo seeks to have the case dismissed as moot.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund asks the owners of Special Memories Zoo to preserve records related to the March barn fire that led to the deaths of multiple animals.

Special Memories Zoo announces its decision to close the zoo and find new placements for most of the animals, according to a letter their lawyer filed in federal court. The zoo begins to transfer animals to different facilities, while other animals remain in the zoo operators’ care. On March 24, a fire breaks out in a barn on the property, killing the animals inside. During a March 25 investigation into the cause of the fire, officers discover the remains of approximately 18 additional animals who had died in other parts of the property prior to the fire. These animals, including approximately 16 goats, a cow, and a tortoise, appear to have died as a result of the zoo’s neglect.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund files a lawsuit for keeping the tigers and other animals in squalid conditions that violate the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as well as state laws protecting captive wild animals.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund sends notice of intent to sue for violations of the Endangered Species Act, state cruelty laws, and public nuisance statutes.

Country music artist Tanya Tucker asks the USDA to investigate Special Memories Zoo.

Special Memories Zoo purchases three lion cubs from Joe Exotic with G.W. Zoo in Wynnewood, Oklahoma, the zoo featured in the hit Netflix documentary “Tiger King.”

The USDA files an official warning against the zoo. The document references a number of violations dated Feb. 25; May 11, 2015; May 4, 2015; and Aug. 13, 2014. The Feb. 25 finding noted a need for a “sufficient number of adequately trained employees” at the zoo.

The USDA cites the zoo for failing to provide drinking water to primates. The USDA cites the zoo multiple times for sanitation issues such as failure to remove excreta and soiled animal bedding.

An employee is bitten by a bear after improperly interacting with the animal.

The USDA cites the zoo for failing to provide drinking water to primates. The USDA cites the zoo multiple times for sanitation issues such as failure to remove excreta and soiled animal bedding.

On multiple occasions, a USDA inspector attempts to conduct an on-site inspection, but reports that a responsible adult is not available to facilitate it.

The USDA cites the zoo multiple times for sanitation issues such as failure to remove excreta and soiled animal bedding.

The zoo is cited by the USDA for failing to maintain written environmental enrichment plans for monkeys.

The zoo is cited by the USDA for failing to maintain written environmental enrichment plans for monkeys.

A USDA inspector attempts to conduct an on-site inspection, but reports that a responsible adult is not available to facilitate it.

A USDA inspector attempts to conduct an on-site inspection, but reports that a responsible adult is not available to facilitate it.

A USDA inspector attempts to conduct an on-site inspection, but reports that a responsible adult is not available to facilitate it.

The zoo is cited by the USDA for obtaining animals from a person who lacked a proper license.