People v. Van Dusen CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 2016A142665California3,267 words

Opinion

Opinion

Banke, J.

BACKGROUND

Defendant came to the attention of Oakland Animal Services (Animal Services) in 2009, when a neighbor complained she was keeping large numbers of cats. At that time, Animal Services visited defendant’s house and found she had about 50 cats, but found they were clean and well cared for. The next year, in response to new complaints, Animal Services returned and found defendant had acquired more cats—for a total of 60 to 70. It also found the cats were no longer as healthy. Animal Services had concerns about the spread of ringworm, which some of the cats already had, giardia, and FIV (feline immunodeficiency virus). With defendant’s consent, Animal Services took several of the healthy, tame cats for adoption. Additionally, defendant signed an agreement promising she would not take 1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless noted. on any more cats. To ensure proper care of the cats defendant was keeping, an Animal Services veterinarian gave defendant several guidelines: There should be no more than 60 cats; the cats should be kept in groups of 10 to reduce infectious disease and stress; each should have “one meter triangulated” of space between food,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.