Floyd County, Texas officials have hired an attorney from Arlington, Texas to handle the case against Alpha Tex Kennels in Lockney, Texas. Floyd County Commissioners voted to hire Donald D. Feare as the case attorney pro tem. My question here is “Why did Floyd county officials choose to go outside of county for an attorney, in lieu of the District Attorney handling the case?”

I believe the answer is obvious-Mr. Feare is a well known animal law attorney who they believe will win the case for them. Mr. Feare is quoted as saying “I've had cases that were worse, and I've had cases where the animal cruelty was not as extensive as it was here. It's not a matter of how much cruelty can you stand, it's that we're not supposed to treat animals cruelly,” according to everythinglubbock.com. Mr. Feare went on to say "I have read articles in print media, but I can't tell you what happened or if they're factual accounts. I can tell you having stepped in; I'm not authorized to take any action in regards to a civil settlement. That's up to the county commissioners. As far as disposition of the dogs, unless my position is terminated, I have no intention of returning those dogs.” 

Now, does this appear that Mr. Feare has appointed himself as judge and jury? Is he forgetting that he is hired as the county attorney pro tem for the hearing and this case was granted by the judge to be heard in front of a jury, who ultimately has the responsibility of deciding the case? Have we forgotten that everyone is entitled to a fair trial? It seems that Mr. Feare has requested no jury, and as of now, this is slated for a November 17, 2011, 9AM hearing date. The defense attorney, Paul Holloway, is contesting this. The court, at its own discretion, granted a trial by jury, based on all claims by all parties involved.

It is just my opinion, but I believe Mr. Feare is basing his argument to deny the trial by jury on Texas HB963, which was passed on May 24, 2011 and went into effect on September 1, 2011. HB963 did not amend HB1451 to include a jury trial from the outset in lieu of a hearing unlike other civil property cases. However, it does allow for trial by jury upon appeal regardless of the court in which the hearing was held. I do still believe that since the court originally granted trial by jury, this decision should be upheld. Texas Statute 821.022(b) states “If peace officer or animal control officer believes animal(s) was cruelly treated, magistrate will issue warrant and set hearing within 10 days to determine if animal(s) was cruelly treated.” Floyd County is already in violation of this statute, as the animals were seized on September 28, 2011. Does it appear that the “legal system” in regards to this case is handling this so illegally?

Donald Duffield Feare, Jr., an adjunct professor of animal law at Texas Weslyan University, has a private practice in Arlington and practices civil litigation and criminal defense. He handles a large volume of animal law cases, and recently was a member of a team of attorneys involved in the largest animal seizure in Arlington Texas history. Feare is also a writer of animal law and a photographer and field contributor to Nature Photographer magazine. In the 1980’s, he established the Wildflight Rescue Foundation and lives on this sanctuary.

His practice consists mainly of animal law, and he has had many ground breaking cases in the animal law field, according to Christy Lawrence, legal assistant to Mr. Feare. He is a Council Member of the Texas State Bar, Animal Law Section. He is a past member of the Texas Humane Legislation Network (THLN). Mr. Feare also serves on a number of boards of non-profit animal welfare organizations. He has worked with Dr. Jane Goodall on animal issues, and has been a key player in drafting and passing animal welfare legislation in Texas. He served as a special prosecutor for Montague County in a 500-dog cruelty seizure from a puppy mill, assisted in the largest cruelty seizure in history of over 27,000 animals and subsequent civil prosecution, and has been licensed to practice law in Texas since 1997.

According to the article, “Digging Deeper into Texas Animal Poli-Tex,”  the sanctuary founded by Mr. Feare has a Co-Director named Linda Yarbrough. Ms. Yarbrough created and owns Companion Animal Care. Her website contains links to THLN, the Texas SPCA and HSUS.  Mr. Feare represented Ms. Yarbrough in a 2007 case against Carrizo Oil and Gas over drilling issues. According to the article, the refuge appears to not rehab birds, yet the name of the refuge implies that it does. It is registered with the State of Texas as a non-profit, yet lists no address or contact information.

With the changes in legislation that were passed during the most recent legislative session in Texas, does anyone else feel that no matter the facts in the case, Alpha Tex Kennels will be used as the “example” for this new legislation? How fair will this hearing really be, and will the genuine facts come to light?

One other note, please. A number of “foster care” people have commented that should the court order the animals be returned to the Smith’s, they will not adhere to the court order. My question is: While the emotion is understood, do you consider it right to advocate breaking the law by not adhering to a court order, should it be ordered? Since you were all for “the law” to be used to seize the dogs, why would you not use the legal system to keep the dogs? Do you feel that committing a crime justifies the end? Just as we strongly encourage responsible pet ownership/breeding practices, we also believe that the law should be the prevailing order in all cases. The law is not a convenience when it is on your side, nor is it to be broken when it is not.

Written and researched by Debi R***