Buoyed by Courts' Changing Attitudes on Personhood, Group Fights to Free Bronx Zoo Elephant
The Nonhuman Rights Project has filed for a writ of habeas corpus for Happy, an African elephant that the group says has been held alone for 12 years at the Bronx Zoo in a 1.15-acre pen.
October 02, 2018 at 06:26 PM
4 minute read
The group that has made unsuccessful attempts in the past to convince New York judges to grant habeas corpus to captive chimpanzees is launching a new fight, this time for the freedom of a 47-year-old elephant who lives in the Bronx Zoo.
The Nonhuman Rights Project has filed for a writ of habeas corpus for Happy, an Asian elephant that the group says has been held alone for 12 years at the Bronx Zoo in a 1.15-acre pen.
The group fought an ultimately losing battle to move chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko to a South Florida animal sanctuary; last year, the Appellate Division, First Department denied habeas for the chimps and the state Court of Appeals declined to grant leave to appeal the First Department decision.
But Steven Wise, president of the Nonhuman Rights Project, said in an interview that in Happy's case, the group is emboldened by the fact that, in the five years since he began representing Tommy and Kiko, some New York judges have begun to take the argument of personhood for animals more seriously.
“Happy, other elephants, and other autonomous nonhuman animals are the victims of severe ongoing injustices,” Wise said in a news release. “We have a moral duty to recognize these injustices as such and to correct them; not just for the sake of animals like Happy, but also to preserve justice for human beings.”
In May, when the Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal the First Department's ruling to grant habeas for Tommy and Kiko, Judge Eugene Fahey took the unprecedented step of writing a concurrence for the denial, in which he criticized the First Department's reasoning and said the high court was not declining to take up the case based on the merits.
Fahey said the First Department's denial of habeas for Tommy and Kiko was based on “nothing more” than the fact that chimps aren't members of the human race, and that the courts must eventually come to grips as to whether animals are entitled to habeas or if they should be considered a “thing” in the eyes of the law.
“The inadequacy of the law as a vehicle to address some of our most difficult ethical dilemmas is on display in this matter,” Fahey said.
Following Fahey's concurrence, Wise said, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department issued a ruling that opened a door for arguing for the personhood of nonhumans. It found that an auto dealership where a defendant took part in a vandalism spree was a private corporation and thus had personhood.
So it's not by happenstance that the group filed the habeas petition for Happy in Orleans County, located in the northwest corner of New York state, some 380 miles from Happy's home at the zoo. It falls within the jurisdiction of the Fourth Department, where Fahey previously served as an Appellate Division judge before he was elevated to the Court of Appeals, and where Wise said he thinks he can find a court to rule in his favor.
In a statement forwarded by a representative, James Breheny, director of the Bronx Zoo and an executive vice president with the Wildlife Conservation Society who is named as defendant in the suit, took jabs at the Nonhuman Rights Project, accusing the group of propagating lies about the Bronx Zoo elephants.
“The Nonhuman Rights Project is exploiting the Bronx Zoo elephants to advance their own failing cause in the courts as they put forth ludicrous legal arguments and lies about our elephants, facilities and staff,” he said.
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 AllManhattan Prosecutors Say They Will Oppose Efforts by Trump Legal Team to Dismiss Case
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
White & Case Settles Wrongful Conviction Lawsuit With City Agreeing to Pay $9.45 Million
Trending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome', DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
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