On January 20, 2011, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania affirmed a trial court’s decision that found a kennel operator in contempt of a Settlement Agreement between the operator and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (“PDA”). The operator and PDA had previously entered a Settlement Agreement where the operator was to remove the excess of the allowed number of dogs. The operator did not remove the excess dogs because the operator argued that PDA had to remove the dogs or approve the removal pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. The court held that the language of the Settle Agreement did not support the operator’s argument and that the Settlement Agreement does not make PDA responsible for removing the excess dogs. In addition the court found that PDA did not have to approve any removal until the operator arranged for the transfer of the excess dogs to a particular facility. For the complete court’s opinion please view Commw. v. Fay.
Written by Jay Angle, Research Assistant