Earlier this week, the Town of Suffield announced that the Superior Court has ruled that Annie and Neil Hornish, the owners of a dog involved in a fatal 2019 mauling incident, are liable to pay over $76,215 in kenneling fees accrued over the course of the two parties’ legal battle over the fate of the dog.
“I am thrilled with the results of the Superior Court case,” said Colin Moll, Suffield’s First Selectman. “The taxpayers of Suffield deserve to be made whole. We are one step closer to the conclusion of this long and unnecessary saga.”
The Hornishes’ dog, a pitbull-pointer named Dexter, was originally ordered to be put down by the Town’s animal control officer in 2019, but the Hornishes appealed the order. The appeal was first brought before the state’s Department of Agriculture and has since made its way through the courts, where it is still ongoing. According to the Town of Suffield, oral arguments in the Hornishes’ appeal were heard on April 14, and a “decision from the Appellate Court is expected in the near future.”
Dexter has been impounded throughout the duration of this case at River Valley Veterinary Hospital. His impoundment has accrued tens of thousands of dollars worth of kenneling fees, which were initially paid by the Hornishes, until they filed a separate suit against the town in 2022, claiming it had been unjustly enriched by their previous payments. Suffield filed a counterclaim seeking to recover the unpaid boarding fees, and on May 5th, the Superior Court ruled in their favor.
Despite the ruling, Annie Hornish told Inside Investigator that she plans on appealing. Hornish said that she believes requiring an owner to pay kenneling fees for their animal while appealing for its life would create a “chilling-effect,” forcing owners to give up prematurely out of financial necessity.
“We do plan on appealing,” said Hornish. “We respectfully disagree with the court’s decision on this and we do feel as though we’ll prevail upon appeal.”
Throughout the case, the Hornishes have argued “to the reasonableness and/or ‘market rate’ of the costs, among others, and argue that a lower daily rate should have been charged,” per the judgment. It also states that they took issue with the fact that they were paying what they believed to be a higher rate due to “medical boarding fees,” but the court was not persuaded.
“The arguments advanced, however, and the evidence offered in support of the arguments are speculative at best,” read the judgment. “These opinions were offered without expert testimony and were based upon speculative lay opinions.”
The ruling stated that the Hornishes’ owe the town $76,215.34 in unpaid kenneling fees, not counting an additional $66.36 a day in fees beginning from Feb. 1, 2025. Additionally, the Court awarded the town a post-judgment interest rate of 7.5% per year. Despite the mounting costs, Hornish said that it will not impact their other case, as she expects a decision will be made soon.
“We hope the appellate courts will rule in our favor,” said Hornish.
Moll said that the Town remains “committed to ensuring the safety and well-being of its residents.”
“The Litigants have dragged this case on for far too long and unnecessarily delayed justice,” said Moll. “While the Town is now able to collect the boarding fees owed, the Town will explore additional remedies to make the taxpayers whole for legal expenses. The Board of Selectmen is committed to taking all necessary legal steps in this matter to protect the public from this dangerous dog until justice can be carried out.”
Was this article helpful?
Topics on this page
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
