Because you are a breeder. Trainers don’t operate from that mindset, unfortunately.
Looks like this is the next court date for Jill Burnell:
www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/MC/courtcal/nameq_mc.cfm?sel_name=burnell
Which means that Marin Humane Society will have the seized horses in their care until at least that time. The costs of the post seizure care is being born by the Humane Society. Please consider donating or bidding:
Or donate or bid on the auction for Marin Humane Society:
http://www.leg-up.org/marin-county-fund-raisingauctiondonation-page.html
[QUOTE=Appsolute;6775592]
HoofJustice works for the MHS.[/QUOTE]
Oh, Thanks for the heads up! That’s even more encouraging!!
Didn’t she only have 10 days to respond to the issues regarding the unlawful living quarters and crap on her site or be fined $5000 a day? Especially the issue with the unapproved water source, this alone will hopefully do her in.
oh, May 31st!! That means they may get more horses if the mares startfoaling in poor conditions.
I don’t have much but I did donate to MHS. Hoping to be able to give more in a little while. They deserve our support.
[QUOTE=NJRider;6775640]
Didn’t she only have 10 days to respond to the issues regarding the unlawful living quarters and crap on her site or be fined $5000 a day? Especially the issue with the unapproved water source, this alone will hopefully do her in.[/QUOTE]
There are more than one Marin County agencies involved, now. Probably, Environmental Health Services and the Planning and Building Departments, besides the MHS.
[QUOTE=NJRider;6775640]
Didn’t she only have 10 days to respond to the issues regarding the unlawful living quarters and crap on her site or be fined $5000 a day? Especially the issue with the unapproved water source, this alone will hopefully do her in.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but that is through Marin County Development Agency, I believe. The May 31st date is in regarding the Petition for Writ of Mandate that Maggie Weems filed, stating they wanted the horses returned to Jill and for the Marin Humane Society to leave them alone unless the Humane Society has a court order. As far as I understand, the judge denied their petition and it got bumped to Superior Court?? The case number on the new court date (http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/MC/courtcal/nameq_mc.cfm?sel_name=burnell) matches the case number on the Writ of Mandate found on RateMyHorsePro.com http://www.ratemyhorsepro.com/equine-court/civil-matters/jill-burnell-petitioner-v-marln-humane-society-respondent.aspx
With the next hearing so far off, presumably RSF will not be able to take possession of Romantic Star until after that date, if at all, and will miss this breeding season? If this whole deal is on the up & up (and I am doubtful), then I’d think she would have a case against Jill too for lost income??
[QUOTE=COTHalter44;6775659]
With the next hearing so far off, presumably RSF will not be able to take possession of Romantic Star until after that date, if at all, and will miss this breeding season? If this whole deal is on the up & up (and I am doubtful), then I’d think she would have a case against Jill too for lost income??[/QUOTE]
That might get a bit complicated with Ronda Stavisky and Jill Burnell having the same lawyer. 
I think it was [EDITED to changed it to] RateMyHorsePro.com article that reported that lawyer Maggie Weems is representing both the Stallion Owner and the Burnells.
[QUOTE=Daventry;6775665]
That might get a bit complicated with Ronda Stavisky and Jill Burnell having the same lawyer. I think it was the Chronicle of the Horse article that reported that laywer Maggie Weems is representing both the Stallion Owner and the Burnells.[/QUOTE]
I’d forgotten that little detail, good point. It’s still all very suspicious to me.
[QUOTE=Daventry;6775665]
That might get a bit complicated with Ronda Stavisky and Jill Burnell having the same lawyer. I think it was the Chronicle of the Horse article that reported that lawyer Maggie Weems is representing both the Stallion Owner and the Burnells.[/QUOTE]
The COTH article has been updated and I’m not seeing any statement that they have the same attorney.
Also, it makes it very clear that Rising Star is unable to get any updates from Marin County on the stallion’s condition.
[QUOTE=PINE TREE FARM SC;6775687]
The COTH article has been updated and I’m not seeing any statement that they have the same attorney.
Also, it makes it very clear that Rising Star is unable to get any updates from Marin County on the stallion’s condition.[/QUOTE]
That info. was included in the ratemyhorsepro article.
If Romantic Star has a broken jaw and is in poor body condition then maybe breeding this year isn’t an option? I would just sort of assume that he would not be available this year with the legal mess and the injury.
What a mess.
Where did the info about the broken jaw come from?
[QUOTE=skydy;6775724]
That info. was included in the ratemyhorsepro article.[/QUOTE]
You are right.
From Rate My Horse Pro:
[I]“A warmblood breeder for years, Burnell’s Gray Fox Farm lists the stallions Redwine, Romantic Star, Federalist, and Aloha. According to Ronda Stavisky, she purchased Romantic Star prior to his injury and seizure from Burnell. She says she is unaware of the horse’s present condition. Weems is also representing Stavisky.”
[/I]http://www.ratemyhorsepro.com/news/court-denies-burnells-petition-new-issues-arise.aspx
Also found it in this article:
“Weems, whose office is in Fairfax, said she also represents a Georgia woman who bought the stallion and was waiting for it to be shipped before it was injured and confiscated.”
http://www.marinij.com/novato/ci_22327901?source=pkg
[QUOTE=Ladybug Hill;6775736]
If Romantic Star has a broken jaw and is in poor body condition then maybe breeding this year isn’t an option? I would just sort of assume that he would not be available this year with the legal mess and the injury.
What a mess.[/QUOTE]
Good point. I was thinking that if he healed without complications, breeding season is still a few months off so it may be possible.
I’ve never been involved in an animal seizure case (and haven’t read the court docs in this one) but it sounds to me like Jill’s attorney filed some papers with the court to challenge the removal of the horses and the court found that, based on what was in front of it at the hearing, removal was proper. That initial order approves removal temporarily. Jill has the right to put on her side of the case before she loses her property permanently (due process of law and all that). If the court hasn’t already, it will set a trial date and in the meantime Jill either cooperates with MHS to try to get her act together or she risks losing more (or hopefully all) her horses.
What is on the docket for 5/31 is a status conference. MHS likely will file a report with the court before the status conference to advise the court what is going on in the matter. That report should be a matter of public record and for a few dollars anyone could get a copy. 5/31 sounds a long way off to me. When kids are removed from their parents the initial status conference is set within 60 days, but either animals are different and/or the Marin County Court, like most California courts, is very busy and understaffed. Probably both.
What a nightmare this has turned out to be. I am glad to hear that MHS will be monitoring carefully as the mares get closer to foaling.
To me, it seems that there are two separate things going on here. Weems has filed for a writ of mandamus directing the return of the horses. After considering the motion and the evidence that the court has before it, it refused to order an immediate return and set a status conference for May 31. By then, it’s possible (however improbable) that Burnell would have complied with all of the Marin County HS demands and gotten her horses back.
The process for Marin County HS in an animal neglect/abuse situation is quite different and, I’ll got out on a limb, relatively unrelated to the petition for mandamus. HS is still in the very early stages of that. In other words, the Court seems to say that Marin County HS can keep on keeping on.
Honestly, what I get from the late court date is that the court slapped down Ms. Weems petition pretty thoroughly. It refused to step into the Marin County HS processes and cut them short.
What’s interesting is whether she has an interlocutory appeal at this stage. My gut feeling, without knowing anything about California law is that she won’t. She almost certainly wouldn’t here. Her hands, without an interlocutory appeal, will be tied until there is a final judgment, which could be many months on–certainly after the status conference.
If I owned RS, I’d be working with the HS and not the courts.
But, as I said, I know nothing about California law or their processes. I’m just going on what I’ve seen before in other states and what things like this mean in court processes.
One complication is that JB / Gray Fox Farm has many creditors owed payments. Anyone receiving property from JB may find out that JB can’t legally sell the property because she owes those assets to others. Legal transfer of horse ownership could get bogged down in court if creditors come forward demanding payment and/or assets to satisfy the outstanding judgments against GFF.
I would never wish this complication on those coming forward trying to help the horses through purchasing them (as one person obviously has). JB has spun quite a web and has shown she is great a gaming the system in her favor and to the loss of others. Especially the horses.
[QUOTE=dilligaff2;6774728]
Thank You SilverBalls.
Everyone–please donate to the cause and help these horses rather than hovering over your keyboards wringing your hands and waiting for the next ‘fact’ to pounce upon with glee.[/QUOTE]
Yet another of my worthless observations, but “dilligaf and Silver Balls” do seem to go together :lol:
:lol:
