Feld Entertainment, Inc., the producer of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, announced today that the company has reached a legal settlement with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) in connection with two federal court cases.
Under the settlement, ASPCA has paid Feld Entertainment $9.3 million to settle all claims related to its part in more than a decade of manufactured litigation that attempted to outlaw elephants in the company's Ringling Bros. Circus. This settlement applies only to the ASPCA. Feld Entertainment's legal proceedings, including its claims for litigation abuse and racketeering, will continue against the remaining defendants, Humane Society of the United States, the Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, Animal Protection Institute United with Born Free USA, Tom Rider and the attorneys involved.
"These defendants
attempted to destroy our family-owned business with a hired plaintiff
who made statements that the court did not believe. Animal activists
have been attacking our family, our company, and our employees for
decades because they oppose animals in circuses. This settlement is a
vindication not just for the company but also for the dedicated men and
women who spend their lives working and caring for all the animals with
Ringling Bros. in the face of such targeted, malicious rhetoric," said
Kenneth Feld, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Feld
Entertainment.
The parties filed dismissal papers today in
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as a result of their
settlement. The settlement covers only Feld Entertainment's claims
against ASPCA for attorneys' fees and damages in the initial Endangered
Species Act (ESA) case filed in 2000 by the animal rights activists and
the resultant racketeering (RICO) case brought by Feld Entertainment in
2007. Discovery in the initial lawsuit uncovered over $190,000 that
these animal activist groups and their lawyers paid to Tom Rider who
lived off of the money while serving as the "injured plaintiff" in the
lawsuit against the circus.
"Our firm has been defending
Feld Entertainment against this onslaught of misguided litigation
brought by animal activist groups for years. As their attorneys, it is
gratifying to finally have a settlement that begins to make up for the
harm inflicted on this company, the family who owns it, and its
employees," said John Simpson of Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., lead
counsel for Feld Entertainment in all of the cases covered by the
settlement with ASPCA.
Background of Case
The
original complaint was filed in July 2000 by the American Society for
the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), the Animal Welfare
Institute, the Fund for Animals and Tom Rider, who is a former Ringling
Bros. employee. The case was dismissed in 2001 but was reinstated in
2003 after an appellate court ruled that if Tom Rider could prove that
he was injured by Ringling Bros.' treatment of the elephants, the case
could proceed. The Animal Protection Institute joined the case in 2006.
The
trial began on February 4, 2009 and lasted approximately six weeks. The
case is ASPCA, et al., v. Feld Entertainment, Inc., No. 03-2006
(D.D.C.)(Hon. Emmet G. Sullivan presiding).
On December 30,
2009, the U.S. District Court ruled in Feld Entertainment's favor
(published as ASPCA v. Feld Entertainment, Inc., 677 F. Supp. 2d 55
(D.D.C. 2009)). In its ruling the Court stated that, "the Court finds
that Mr. Rider is essentially a paid plaintiff and fact witness who is
not credible, and therefore affords no weight to his testimony regarding
the matters discussed herein, i.e., the allegations related to his
standing to sue." (
www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/uploadedFiles/ASPCA%20Memorandum%20Opinion.pdf
)
That decision found that the plaintiffs' litigation was
based on the untruthful testimony of a paid plaintiff and witness who
the Court found received at least $190,000 in payments as his sole
source of income over an eight year period by animal special interest
groups, including ASPCA, their lawyers and an entity founded and
controlled by those lawyers, the Wildlife Advocacy Project.
The
Court also ruled, "that ensuring Mr. Rider's continued participation as
a plaintiff was a motivating factor behind the payments to him, and
that these payments were a motivating factor for his continued
involvement in the case." The Court also ruled against the other
plaintiffs in the case: "because the organizational plaintiffs have not
established an injury in fact, traceable to FEI's actions that can be
redressed by the Court, the organizational plaintiffs have no standing
to sue under Article III of the United States Constitution."
Furthermore,
the Court ruled that "based upon his failure to complain, the Court
finds that Mr. Rider either (1) did not witness elephant mistreatment
when he was employed by FEI or (2) any mistreatment he did witness did
not affect him to the extent that he suffered an aesthetic or emotional
injury." The Court's December 2009 ruling was affirmed in its entirety
by the Court of Appeals on October 28, 2011.
Based upon what
was revealed in ASPCA, et al., v. Feld Entertainment, Feld
Entertainment brought suit in the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia against ASPCA, HSUS and other animal rights
activists and their lawyers alleging violations of the RICO statute and
Virginia Conspiracy Act, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process.
The court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss that case on July 9,
2012. (
http://www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/uploadedFiles/First%20Amended%20Feld%20Entertainment%20RICO%20Complaint.pdf
)
Via press release
