 |
|
| Owners: Curt and Becki Peters | Piggy: Ludwig |
| Date they won: June 1999 | |
| Here's their story: Hello friends, I was hoping not to have to contact you on this issue again, but since the city has elected to drag my wife and I through the legal system in an attempt to force us to give up our beloved potbelly Ludwig, I am asking once again for your support in difficult times. Since there was no activity on the citys part from the time we obtained legal counsel in October until March this year, we had hoped the city of Livonia had decided to leave Ludwig alone. Unfortunately, it seems they were only biding their time. Becki and I were both served with arraignment notices about a month ago. Since then, our attorney, a passionate animal advocate named Matt Savich (one of only five lawyers in all of Michigan who actually specializes in animal defense) has been trying to get the city to define exactly what it is they are finally charging us with. Up until now, they have listed at least seven different charges, none of which really applied to our situation. This past Monday, Becki and I went to court and the city was compelled to give its official charge. It would appear that they have reverted back to their original charge: Ludwig is livestock (their definition specifically mentions "animals used for food or fiber") and is prohibited in a residential district. I dont have the exact language in my hands just yet. I have asked our attorney to fax me a copy of the actual language of the charges so that I might pass them on to interested parties. While I am waiting for this information, I wonder if any of you could suggest sources of information new and old that might help me to assemble a cogent and effective description of the differences between potbellied pigs and the pigs that are raised as livestock. I know, I know... the answer seems obvious to those of us that own potbellies: these are private pets not kept for food or fiber! However, I know you all also know the seriousness of this charge and the confusion that can swirl around legal proceedings involving these animals. Our lawyer has specifically requested this information because he knows his effectiveness in this case will depend heavily upon his ability to clearly and concisely draw the line between Ludwig and livestock. If you have any other ideas related to our situation, please share them with us. We can not express enough our appreciation of your support in the past and we hope you will be willing to continue to help us now. Thank you! Sincerely, Curt Peters I would like to add because they were unable to have other pets due to alergies. I made the recomendation that they get a perscription from their doctor to have Ludwig and they won their case this way. |
|
|
|
