Hide table of contents

Overview

These are my notes of the "Civil Litigation for Farmed Animals" from EAGxBerkeley, given by Alene Anello, president of Legal Impact for Chickens (LIC).

It was an excellent talk, exploring a front of the animal welfare movement that, in my opinion, has the potential to be extremely effective, and is very much neglected. (Would love to hear if you agree/disagree on this).

LIC also is currently hiring lawyers, so if you know someone who might be interested, let them know. This is a rare opportunity for folks with legal training to get professionally involved in the movement (those paid positions are hard to come by).

==================

Talk Notes

Intro

  • Premise: improving conditions on factory farms will go a long way towards helping chickens suffering
  • The law prohibits animal cruelty (in theory)
    • (Gave an excerpt from the California Penal Code)
  • Yet undercover investigations in farms expose such cruelty on a regular basis
  • Footnote on criminal laws: there are some states that have exemptions for animal agriculture
    • But not in California
    • Even states that have exemptions – it’s not for *every* kind of abuse. There’s a lot of stuff that happens in the farms that isn’t technically exempted
  • But police and prosecutors don’t really enforce it
    • And even when they do – it’s against individual workers and not the company/CEOs
      • Why? Not sure. Perhaps because it’s easier to go after someone with less power.
      • Attorney generals are almost always politicians (elected / politically appointed), which means they have an interest in keeping powerful companies happy
    • Some reasons for not enforcing at all:
      • A reason they often officially give: those are misdemeanors, and they’re more interested in pursuing felonies (also for funding reasons)
      • Possibly: corruption
      • Possibly:  “soft corruption” like not wanting to make powerful people angry
      • Resources and priorities

 

LIC’s Solution: “Creative” Civil Litigation

  • Not how civil litigation is usually works
  • Animal cruelty is a crime, would more “naturally” be handled by the criminal system – but since the criminal system doesn’t do anything, LIC looks for ways to bring it to civil litigations
  • LIC sues companies and executives

 

Example Cases

Example 1: Costco

  • Costco is not only a store but also breeds, raises and slaughters chickens (and sells the meat)
  • Bred them so fast that they could not even stand, eat, drink. Starved to death
  • That’s against the law – you’re required to feed your animals
  • There are some fiduciary duties – which are on the executives, personally, towards the company
    • One of them: “don’t break the law”
    •  If the executives haven’t fulfilled the duties – the company can sue them
      • Which wouldn’t usually happen because the execs control the company
      • But! The company also has owners. In the case of a publicly traded company – share holders
      • So LIC found Costco shareholders to work with
      • (Q: do you have to find existing share holders or can you just buy shares and then sue? A: Alene doesn’t know, there isn’t really a precedent).
  • Result:
    • The good news: the judge did say that the company has a responsibility re animal cruelty. Which means LIC can bring more cases like that!
    • The bad new: had a different interpretation to the law re what happened at Costco, so dismissed the case

 

Example 2: “Case Farms” – KFC supplier

  • Treated chicks as “dispensible”. Let machine drive over them etc. Pretty harrowing.
  • Happened in North California. Has a law against animal cruelty, with an exemption for food/poultry.
    • That was what CF’s defense was based on. That thereby anything they do is exempt.
    • LIC disagrees. If you kill the chicks they’re not really used for food.
  • This was dismissed and LIC appealed. Currently in the NC court of appeals.

 

Example 3: Rhode Island Beef and Veal

  • LIC looks for any way to make cruelty a liability.
  • Judges have a *lot* of leeway in sentencing. Can give a stricter/lesser sentence based on judgement call.
  • A slaughterhouse was sentenced. Criminal case.
  • “amicus brief” = a way for someone who’s not on a part in the lawsuit can submit a brief to the court on a specific lawsuit. For example if they’re an expert on the subject.
  • LIC submitted such a brief. 
  • Result:
    • Good news: the judge let them submit it (so they can now do that again for other cases). 
    • Bad news: sentence was still shorter than LIC thinks it should be.

 

Q&A

What are LIC’s bottlenecks?

  • Concerned about lack of undercover investigations to expose cruelty
  • Surprised to find that people working in the meat and egg industry hate the companies they work for
    • Could potentially help, tell them about cruelty that’s been happening
    • Had such workers reach out to them
    • Had ads target such workers, to reach out to LIC if they want to expose such cases
    • Alene thinks this would have happened a lot more if the workers weren’t frightened of the companies
      • Especially since a lot of them are undocumented workers

Why the focus on chickens?

  • (Disclaimer: they focus on chickens but do aim to help all farmed animals, e.g. example case 3 mentioned above)
  • Three reasons for the focus:
    • Scale: there are so many chickens that are treated so badly. More so than cows/pigs
    • Birds are more neglected than mammals
    • While the scale of chickens in animal ag is smaller than sea animals and insects – it will be probably too hard to do anything for them in court right now, because:
      • State laws don’t necessarily apply to them
      • Harder to get judges to “feel bad” for fish (chickens are hard enough) 

2

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

There are no more recommendations left.

Comments2


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since: Today at 7:34 PM

Thank you for posting this, Noa!!!!! <3 <3 <3 

Thank you very much for the opportunity and I will participate in the Fast Forums.

Curated and popular this week
 · 1d ago · 1m read
 · 
Hi FAST!  After decades of tireless advocacy, Sweden has become cage-free – a historic achievement for hens and for everyone who has stood by their side. Millions of hens once endured life in cramped cages, but thanks to Project 1882’s persistent, long-term efforts, there are now no hens kept in cages anywhere in Sweden.  This breakthrough is unique. To our knowledge, Sweden is the only country in the world to have gone cage-free without a legal ban. Project 1882 confirmed this shift by obtaining data from regional authorities and the egg industry.  In 1988, the Swedish Parliament voted to ban cages – but that promise to the hens was ultimately broken. In response, Project 1882 intensified its efforts: publishing detailed reports, launching repeated public awareness campaigns, holding corporate dialogues, and engaging directly with policymakers.   Thanks to these efforts, and following discussions with Project 1882, more than 85 companies –– from retailers to hotel and restaurant chains – have taken a stand against cage eggs. Since 2008, over 17 million hens have been spared a life in cages.  This success shows what persistent, collective action can achieve – even when political will falls short.  At the EU level, Project 1882 also collected 50,000 signatures for the End the Cage Age initiative, pushing for a ban across the EU. With delays pushing the proposal to 2026, Project 1882 is now urging Sweden to take the final step: A legal ban on cages, to ensure they never return.  Read more: https://www.project1882.org/news/sweden-becomes-cage-free  
 · 6d ago · 1m read
 · 
Hello everyone! We wanted to ask for your help with three specific actions regarding the Egg Labeling Bill being discussed in Congress. This month is crucial. Currently, the Egg Labeling Bill in Peru is before the Consumer Rights Committee. This committee will vote on it in the coming weeks, and we expect it to be passed to the full Congress for final approval. 1 - Updated petition https://shorturl.at/lT5WY 2 - Automatic link to email members of Congress whose vote is undecided on the bill https://tinyurl.com/yzm2sw9u 3 - If you use Twitter, this thread is very important because you can tag members.   FIRST: Important update on the Egg Labeling Bill! A new substitute text was presented that responds point by point to the MIDAGRI arguments. Here we explain it easily. @waldemar_cerron @katy_ugarte @rosiotorressali @edgartellom   SECOND: Will the price of eggs go up? FALSE. The PL doesn't require changes in breeding or processing. It only asks for transparency: indicating whether the egg was raised in a cage, shed, or pasture. Furthermore, bulk eggs are excluded. @waldemar_cerron @katy_ugarte @rosiotorressali @edgartellom   THIRD: Does it affect small producers? NO. The PL excludes those with 1,000 hens or fewer. It only applies to medium and large producers. @waldemar_cerron @katy_ugarte @rosiotorressali @edgartellom   FOURTH: Do all animal husbandry methods guarantee animal welfare? NO. Hens in cages are kept immobilized. This system was banned in the EU more than 10 years ago. The PL doesn't prohibit it, it just informs. @waldemar_cerron @katy_ugarte @rosiotorressali @edgartellom   FIFTH: Why is it important? Because information empowers. Consumers have the right to know how what they consume was produced. @waldemar_cerron @katy_ugarte @rosiotorressali @edgartellom   Thank you very much!  
 · 5d ago · 1m read
 · 
Hello FAST! I hope you have a great week! We have a new announcement about Muxsa, a nationally distributed manufacturer that sells to 10 supermarkets and more than 30 organic stores in the departments of Lima, Arequipa, Trujillo, and Chiclayo in Peru. MUXSA COOKIES Link: https://sites.google.com/view/muxsagalletas/nosotros Scale: National - Peru Who: Arba Failed tactics: None Successful tactics: Working from the beginning of conversations with the entire team, owner, and production chain. Scalability: Developing other nationally distributed brands. Follow-up: We will stay in touch to request reports on its implementation. Best regards,
 · 2d ago · 7m read
 · 
Each year, Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE) invites animal charities from around the world to apply for our in-depth evaluations. Our goal is to identify the most impactful giving opportunities for donors seeking to contribute to a world where all animals can flourish. We are thrilled to announce that 10 charities have been selected for this year’s charity evaluations, based on their excellent applications and the highly promising nature of their work. Among these are six current Recommended Charities that are being re-evaluated before their two-year recommendation status expires: Faunalytics, Legal Impact for Chickens, New Roots Institute, Shrimp Welfare Project, The Humane League, and Wild Animal Initiative. On November 4, 2025, some of this year’s evaluated charities will be awarded ACE’s two-year recommendation status, joining the five charities recommended in 2024: Aquatic Life Institute, Çiftlik Hayvanlarını Koruma Derneği, Dansk Vegetarisk Forening, Good Food Fund, and Sinergia Animal. All charities evaluated by ACE have undergone a thorough selection process and have demonstrated significant potential in running cost-effective programs and engaging in impactful work. Even those that are not ultimately recommended are likely among the most effective in their respective fields. Below, we give an overview of our selection process and introduce the 10 charities that successfully reached the evaluation stage in 2025. Our Selection Process Our selection process is an initial assessment of applicants’ programs, with a focus on their theory of change and the scale of their impact for animals. The process is designed to ensure that we dedicate our resources to evaluating organizations with strong potential to be among the most impactful giving opportunities in the world. In 2025, our selection process began with 43 initial applicants, which were narrowed to 25 charities after an eligibility screening. These organizations then underwent a detailed assessment in w