Advertisement

Judge Tosses Out Suit That Arose From Pal the Pug’s Death

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

Putting the ghost of Pal the Pug to rest, at least for now, a judge threw out the remainder of a lawsuit Thursday filed by a veterinarian against Los Angeles Department of Animal Services officers.

The dog, who belonged to an Encino resident, was found, barely alive, in April 1997, his skin torn off. Dr. Melvyn Richkind said the dog had been skinned alive by someone with a knife, but animal services officers said he had been attacked by a coyote.

Pal’s death caused an uproar across Los Angeles. Reward money offered for the capture of the pug’s killer totaled $26,000, and 150 people held a candlelight vigil to mourn his death.

Advertisement

Richkind, the last veterinarian to treat the 4-year-old, tan and black pug before it died, sued Lts. Richard Felosky and Keith Kramer for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Richkind contended that the animal services officers defamed him by publicly questioning his professional competence.

San Fernando Superior Court Judge Howard J. Schwab threw out Richkind’s claims this week, citing insufficient evidence. The lawsuit “was worthless from the start,” said Deputy City Atty. George Lowry.

Richkind could not be reached for comment, but his lawyer, Richard Wynne, said he would appeal. “I believe [Judge Schwab] was mistaken,” Wynne said. “There was more than adequate material to go to the jury.”

Schwab dismissed the defamation claim Tuesday. After hearing testimony by several witnesses, he threw out the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim on Thursday.

Felosky said he and others at animal services felt fully vindicated.

“This was the most twisted case I have ever been involved in in all my years,” said the 31-year department veteran. “This was to make Animal [Services] look bad. If they don’t know the meaning of the term ‘malicious prosecution,’ I hope they do now.”

Advertisement

Four months ago, Schwab dismissed the first part of the lawsuit, which claimed that animal services officials had illegally searched the veterinarian’s Northridge clinic and violated his civil rights.

Advertisement