Meet the Attorneys Behind Attempts to Remove 3 Elephants From Connecticut Zoo
The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed a lower court ruling, denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in an animal-rights group's attempt to remove three elephants from the Commerford Zoo.
August 19, 2019 at 04:27 PM
4 minute read
The founder and president of an animal rights group who is also one of its attorneys in seeking to remove three elephants from a Connecticut petting zoo says he will not be deterred by a Connecticut Appellate Court ruling that didn’t go his way Friday.
“We look forward to seeking further review of this decision in the Connecticut Supreme Court, and we feel both hopeful and confident that it will accept our request as a matter of law and justice,” said Steven Wise, president of the Nonhuman Rights Project, in a statement issued on its website. Wise is now seeking to have the state Supreme Court review the Appellate Court ruling rejecting a habeas corpus petition, which would have paved the way for freeing the animals.
Wise, along with Cohen & Wolf’s David Zabel, are representing elephants Beulah, Karen and Millie, who they hope to relocate from the Goshen-based Commerford Zoo to a sanctuary in California.
Here is a closer look at Wise and Zabel:
Steven Wise:
Wise is founder and president of the NhRP, representing nonhuman animals in the courtroom and serving as lead spokesman for the organization’s work, according to his website.
He has practiced animal protection law for 30 years throughout the United States and is the author of four books, including “Rattling the Cage—Toward Legal Rights for Animals” as well as “Drawing the Line—Science and the Case for Animal Rights.”
A frequent lecturer on animal rights-related topics, Wise received his undergraduate degree from the College of William & Mary, and his law degree from Boston University Law School.
David Zabel:
Zabel is a principal in Cohen & Wolf’s litigation, employment and labor group, as well as its municipal bankruptcy and legal ethics groups.
He has extensive experience in complex commercial litigation in federal and state courts and arbitration proceedings, including representing policyholders in coverage disputes with insurers, real estate litigation, business torts, and complex bankruptcy proceedings, according to his firm’s website.
Zabel also represents business owners and management, and counsels employers in a variety of employment matters, including discrimination, wrongful discharge claims, employment agreements, and personnel policies and procedures. He received his law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1982.
The attorneys are considering next steps after a court decision that went against their client, the Nonhuman Rights Project based in Coral Springs, Florida.
In the 3-0 ruling, the Connecticut Appellate Court denied the group’s petition that argued the animals are “persons” entitled to liberty and equality for the purposes of habeas corpus. The 11-page ruling that Judge Christine Keller authored for the panel sided with a lower court, which had declined to issue a writ of habeas corpus on because it found the NhRP had no legal standing in the litigation.
“There are profound implications for a court to conclude that an elephant, or any nonhuman animal for that matter, is entitled to assert a claim in a court of law,” Keller wrote. “In the present case, we have little difficulty concluding that the elephants—who are incapable of bearing legal duties, submitting to societal responsibilities, or being legally accountable for failing to uphold those duties and responsibilities—do not have standing to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus because they have no legally protected interest that possibly can be adversely affected.”
The Commerford Zoo has yet to retain attorney representation and has not filed briefs in the case. Its owner, Robert Commerford, did not respond to a request for comment Monday.
Meanwhile, Wise is arguing the elephants, which he said are autonomous animals, are being illegally imprisoned.
In his statement, Wise said: “It is their rightlessness that keeps them imprisoned and exploited in the Commerford Zoo.”
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250