Our Cases


Some of our current and past public pending cases include:

Rulon et al. v. City of San Jacinto et al.:

Photo of Cinnamon, a tan pit bull

Expand Animal Rights Now and Ryther Law Group are honored to be representing Mark Rulon and Southern California Pit Bull Rescue, in memory of Georgia, Cinnamon, and every other animal whose lives were lost at Haven Pet Center, formerly known as Ramona Humane Society. Our firm has initiated a lawsuit against the City of San Jacinto, Haven Pet Center, and Jeff Sheppard to bring justice for Georgia, Cinnamon, and every other dog who was wrongfully euthanized at Haven Pet Center. The lawsuit includes claims for violations of the Hayden Act, the Public Records Act, and the Unfair Competition Law, and claims concerning Haven’s failure to keep proper records and failure to provide prompt and necessary veterinary care. We believe the Hayden Act was violated in some of the most egregious ways we have witnessed during our animal rights litigation careers. We will continue to share updates on this case as we proceed.

DelValle v. Hodgeson et al.

photo of Marley, a lab mix in a service dog jacket

Our client's beloved service dog, Marley, suffered horribly as a result of extremely negligent post-surgical veterinary care, causing a resistant bacterial infection that cost him his leg. Tragically, Marley was unable to act as our client's service dog due to his injury, and he ultimately passed away shortly after his amputation procedure. This case proceeded to a jury trial in August 2023. Partner Sarah A. Thompson and paralegal Samantha Henderson fought vigorously to obtain justice for Marley and closure for our client. As a result of our team's efforts, our client prevailed, obtaining emotional distress and punitive damages pursuant to Civil Code section 3340, both of which are not common in veterinary malpractice cases and which further our goal of expanding the rights of animals under the law.  The defendants appealed this verdict, but we were able to settle the case on appeal, and our client felt vindicated that justice for Marley prevailed. 

Galeno et al. v. Lodi et al.

Photo of Enzo, a black and white husky sitting and wearing a red and white bandana

We had the honor of representing the Galeno family against the City of Lodi and related entities and individuals after their beloved friendly husky Enzo was tragically killed by Lodi police through use of a taser. We were truly appalled to learn of Enzo’s horrific death.

This case settled pre-litigation for an undisclosed sum. We have also been able to obtain information the family desired regarding individuals involved and changes and training in the City of Lodi to ensure that this does not happen again.

We were grateful for the opportunity to represent the Galeno family and be Enzo’s voice. He will never be forgotten, and we promise to continue to fight for canine and other animal companions like Enzo who are wrongfully killed.

This case has settled, and the joint statement issued by the Galeno family and Lodi can be found here.

Breach of Contract Case Re Rescue Pigs

Photo of plaque outside pig enclosure saying, "The Pig Enclosure made possible by Sarah Thompson & Jill Ryther of Ryther Law Group Built 2021"

We assisted our rescue client, in a breach of contract case, to obtain the requisite funding for their amazing rescue pigs so they could live out their lives in peace at our client’s sanctuary.

Our client shared: “Sarah, Jill and the team at Ryther Law Group saved our nonprofit animal sanctuary and the pigs we took in from a very shocking situation. Sarah and Jill were there for us every step of the way through several difficult and tremendously stressful months of negotiations with the pigs’ previous neglectful owner. Ultimately because of their hard work, determination and fierce love of animals they ensured the pigs we saved are able to live out their days peacefully and happily here at our nonprofit! There is no world in which we could have achieved this outcome without Sarah and Jill. They are truly animal heroes!”

The rescue sent us a photo of a plaque (left) they added to the pig pen after the case ended. We are truly honored, to say the very least.

Nguyen v. PetSmart, LLC et al.

Photo of Suri, a tan mixed dog, in a blanket

Plaintiff’s family member, a previously healthy dog named Suri, died while in the care of a PetSmart hotel having been “found dead” despite PetSmart advertising that it provides “around-the-clock care”. Defendant advertises that “Guests will feel at home with the around-the-clock care of our pet-loving staff”, that it offers a “safe, clean…environment”, that “[t]he safety, health, and happiness of our customers, pets and associates are a top priority”, and that it provides “24/7 supervised care by trained professional associates” and “safe indoor accommodations”, and advises clients that “PetSmart will exercise reasonable judgment on the suitability of Services we provide to your Pet based on commercially reasonable standards and the information you disclose to us.” However, Plaintiff contends that the environment was not safe or clean, and there was clearly not 24/7 care if they “found” Suri dead. Moreover, Plaintiff believes PetSmart did not exercise reasonable judgment with respect to Plaintiff’s animals, resulting in Suri’s untimely death and injury to both Dee and Kai. Unfortunately, this is not the only case of dogs becoming seriously ill and/or dying while in or as a result of Defendant’s care. Ryther Law Group filed suit against PetSmart for the wrongful and unlawful death of Plaintiff’s beloved companion Suri and for the damages to her and her two other beloved dogs Dee and Kai, as well as claims for false advertising and unlawful business practices. This case has resolved.

Rubin et al. v. Mohawk Alley Animal Hospital et al.


Photo of Disco, a light tan terrier dog, in a park

Disco, a four-and-a-half-year-old terrier was seen at Mohawk Alley Animal Hospital for a dental cleaning and to possibly have one tooth extracted. While under anesthesia, Defendants pressured Plaintiffs into agreeing to another 15 teeth extracted, claiming six were baby teeth that had not fallen out. To this day, Disco has not grown any adult teeth to fill the voids left by those six alleged baby teeth. Worse, there was some sort of complication that was concealed by Defendants causing an infection in Disco’s tail, which ultimately led to the tail to the having to be amputated! Plaintiffs have confirmed that this is not the only injury of this exact nature to occur at Defendants’ facility – another dog also suffered from a tail injury after undergoing dental surgery. This case has resolved.

Barry v. Sehaj Grewal, DVM and The Melrose Vet


Photo of Pip, a dachshund, sitting in the snow

Plaintiff brought his young healthy dog Pip to Dr. Grewal for a routine neuter surgery. Plaintiff was unaware that Dr. Grewal was on probation with the California Veterinary Medical Board at the time. Tragically, Pip died a few days later. To make matters worse, prior to Pip’s tragic death, Plaintiff reached out to Dr. Grewal, and Dr. Grewal did not offer any assistance. Disturbingly, Dr. Grewal’s lead Veterinary Technician at the time has informed Plaintiff that she knew of “three other animals who died of complications that month alone.” Later, it was discovered that Dr. Grewal knew he had done the sutures improperly and lied to Plaintiff not wanting to admit his wrongdoing. Ryther Law Group has filed a lawsuit against Dr. Grewal and the Melrose Vet on behalf of Plaintiff seeking justice for Pip. Recently, this case resolved.

Mary Lou Rane v. Los Angeles Department of Animal Services

Photo of Codie Bear, a light tan lab mix dog in a field of yellow flowers

RLG filed a petition for writ of administrative mandamus on behalf of our client, Dr. Mary Lou Rane, for violations of her constitutional rights to due process. The writ was filed because the ruling, made by the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services, against Dr. Rane and her dog, Codie Bear, was based on an administrative hearing report containing many facts that were clearly inaccurate, false, or even nonexistent. The writ further alleges that exculpatory evidence was ignored and that a financially motivated complaining witness was given full credibility, while the only other eyewitnesses were considered non-credible despite no evidence to support that conclusion. The writ also includes Dr. Rane’s appeal to the Board of Commissioners, which was improperly held. The writ names the Department of Animal Services, the City of LA, and the Board of Commissioners as defendants. It was filed in LA Superior Court in February, 2021. Since the issues in Dr. Rane’s case can be found in many other animal control hearings and appeals, Ryther Law Group also sent a letter to all defendants, prior to filing suit, requesting changes to policies and procedures as settlement. After receiving no response, the writ was filed. The case settled and the designation against her dog, Codie Bear, as potentially dangerous was reversed.

Humane Hunting Legislation, Kauai


Photo of Sarah Thompson in Hawaii with rescue pig, feeding pig through the enclosure fence

The conversation surrounding potential solutions to Hawaii’s wild and feral pig problem has always been a contentious one – the pigs are simultaneously considered an invasive species that causes environmental degradation, a direct link to the state’s history and culture, and a source of income, food, and entertainment. Because of the nonexistence of effective legislation pertaining to hunting pigs, insufficient funding for local environmental and animal rescue/rehabilitation organizations, and the lack of comprehensive and mandatory education for both hunters and enforcement officers, the overpopulation problem has manifested itself into both ineffective and inhumane hunting practices that are either widely accepted or ignored. We wrote a legislative proposal which was presented to a county council in Kauai, where our clients, who wish to remain anonymous, reside. While the bill was not introduced in 2022, we plan to work with our clients to propose the legislation again.

These are just a few of our active and past public cases. In addition, we represent numerous clients in settlement negotiations and assist many other clients with small claims cases. A few of those cases include:

A case against a pharmaceutical company whose drug has caused our clients’ dog to suffer from horrible seizures.

A case against a boarding facility for negligent care that led to the death of our clients’ dog.

Cases against veterinarians for grossly negligent care leading to severe injuries to our clients’ animals.

Disputes over the custody of animals.

We are also proud to represent many local rescue groups, among other animal rights and welfare nonprofits.