Hide table of contents
Legal & PolicyFarmed AnimalsCareers & Volunteering
Frontpage

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 8:49 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
 · 2d ago · 1m read
 · 
Dear Colleagues, The Animal Law Foundation has placed a fake advertisement in London to raise awareness about the contrast between what the public is sold and the reality of animal farming. This follows a report and an investigation into how animals raised for food are depicted and the reality of the lives animals live. Actress and comedian Diane Morgan and TV Presenter Wendy Turner joined us to raise awareness about this Food Chain Misinformation! The Animal Law Foundations work included an investigation into supermarkets, producers and the media in the UK, which revealed that the dominant image for animal farming is happy and healthy animals outside, this is despite the fact 85% are raised on industrial farms. This is against the backdrop of laws and rules protecting consumers and the public from misleading and dishonest information. You can learn more about our work here and read the report here.  You can find photos from the day and ways you can support the action in our partner pack here. Please also find our links to one of our films from the day with Diane Morgan below, we would be grateful if you could share on your platforms. X (Twitter) Instagram Linkedin Bluesky Threads TikTok YouTube Thank you for all your support, Morgane
 · 2d ago · 1m read
 · 
In the vegan and animal advocacy movement, operations professionals are the engine behind the mission - keeping organizations running smoothly, sustainably, and strategically. But let’s be honest: being “in operations” often means wearing every hat at once. You’re responding to people’s needs, managing financial activity, ensuring legal compliance, maintaining systems, and reducing risk and solving unexpected problems - sometimes all in a single day. On top of that, you’re shaping internal culture, promoting wellbeing to prevent burnout, reimagining how teams work together, and exploring how AI can support your mission. It’s a complex mix of responsibilities and specialties - all of it essential, and much of it out of sight. To support, strengthen and celebrate this critical leadership, PEPR is launching 'Enabling Impact: The Animal Advocacy Ops Collective' - an Operations Community for the Farmed Animal & Vegan Advocacy Movement - a collaborative space for connection, shared insights, and collective impact. Members will also gain access to tailored programming, tools, and trend insights designed to help you thrive in your role and power your organization forward.  Please head over to our sign up page to let us know if you are interested in taking part. This new program is in addition to PEPR's existing program offering strategic & advisory operational support to farmed animal advocacy organizations through which we accept organizations on a rolling basis. 
 · 9h ago · 10m read
 · 
A hidden crisis Literally, quintillions1 of animals are suffering and dying right now in the wild, due to disease, hunger, thirst, excessive heat or cold, and other factors. Yet, most people—including those who express concern for animals—fail to give importance to this issue. Why? In this article, we explore the cognitive biases2 that lead us to ignore one of the world’s largest sources of suffering and death.3 Understanding these biases can help us think more clearly about our moral responsibilities. The magnitude of the problem When we think of animal suffering, we often picture factory farms or labs that test on animals. These are indeed serious problems. But the number of wild animals is vastly larger, estimated between 1 and 10 quintillion at any given time.4 To understand this, consider the following analogy: If we compressed the total number of animals exploited by humans and the total number of wild animals into a one-year timeline, the animals used by humans would represent just 14 seconds. Wild animals would represent the remaining 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 46 seconds.1 The vast majority of wild animals suffer daily due to natural causes. Despite its immense scale, this issue receives very little attention. Even among animal advocates and animal ethicists, the problem remains largely ignored. This doesn’t seem logical when looking at the figures. Below, we will explore several biases that can cause this. Status quo bias: Resistance to changing beliefs Our minds are naturally resistant to change, whether in habits or beliefs. This is known as status quo bias. Several related patterns reinforce this: * Bandwagon effect: we tend to believe what those around us believe * System justification bias: we defend current systems and norms * Conservatism bias: we hesitate to update our beliefs, even with new evidence Key question: If everyone around you focused only on animal exploitation, how likely would you be to think about the suffering o