The Court Action

On April 27, 2006, seven chimpanzees’ names—Sarah, Sheba, Darrell, Ivy, Keeli, Emma, and Harper—were called out by the presiding judge, John Specia. The judge read those names from a complaint filed by Vance & Sailors, a law firm hired by PETA to represent the OSU chimpanzees. The complaint asked for immediate relief, because two of the chimpanzees had already died at Primarily Primates. The OSU professor who used this group of chimpanzees for so many years refused to sign on as the animals’ “Next Friend” in court documents, because she wanted to use them again in research. But two of the chimpanzees’ former caretakers at OSU stepped up to help ensure that the chimpanzees, who were frightened, lonely, confused, and depressed, might have a chance to receive proper care during their retirement. Judge Specia raised his eyebrows at the notion of chimpanzees as plaintiffs but granted them a hearing for the following week. Kermit and Bobby (two chimpanzees who had been transported from OSU with the others) were already dead, and time was of the essence for the others. Click here to read the original filing.

On May 4, 2006, Judge Michael Peden heard from attorneys on both sides in his chambers. The contract between OSU and PPI called for food, enrichment, cohesive social groups, and a rich, varied environment with proper health care to be provided for the chimpanzees, a far cry from their reality at PPI, where they were descending into depression and privation. Judge Peden ordered that PPI be inspected by an independent expert, whose report found that there was standing sewage and an open cesspool of untreated fecal material as well as an enclosure infested with cockroaches, that the youngest chimpanzees were exposed to ground temperatures of 115°F with no shade whatsoever, and that routine health care was virtually nonexistent.

PETA offered to provide a shade cloth for the youngest chimpanzee’s enclosure, but despite our pleas, PPI director Wally Swett refused to allow even that small comfort in the blazing Texas heat. PETA’s attorneys and their staff members scoured thrift stores in San Antonio for toys, books, and blankets for the chimpanzees who were caged at PPI with only concrete and metal to lie on. They spent hours smearing peanut butter between the pages of magazines—one of the chimpanzees’ favorite treats—and they ordered boxes of fresh fruits and vegetables for the animals. But Swett denied the animals all these treats—he wouldn’t even let the court-appointed visitors give them a banana.

On June 22, 2006, Judge Mireles made a critical ruling, declaring the chimpanzees to be the legal beneficiaries of a trust instead of the objects of a contract between OSU and PPI. Primarily Primates’ donors would have gasped to hear PPI’s attorney argue that because animals are mere “property,” they could not be beneficiaries of a trust. The court appointed San Antonio attorney Charles Jackson, Master in Chancery, to make recommendations on behalf of the chimpanzees.

PETA flew primate behaviorists and veterinarians to San Antonio so that Mr. Jackson could hear what chimpanzees need and who they are. The two former OSU caretakers were escorted into the facility to assess the current welfare of the chimpanzees. These women, who had cared for the chimpanzees at OSU for six years, were crushed to see that Sarah and Sheba had each lost 25 to 40 pounds since they had boarded the truck to leave OSU. Veterinarians, chimpanzee experts, and zoo curators from North Carolina, California, Canada, and Louisiana filed in to PPI and were horrified at the conditions there—not just for the OSU chimpanzees, but for all the animals they were able to see. PPI has almost 800 animals of various species, including 70 other chimpanzees, and only five staff members to care for them all!

The wait for the Master’s decision was agonizing, knowing as we did what the chimpanzees were enduring. On August 15, Charles Jackson made his recommendation to Judge Mireles: The OSU chimpanzees should be moved without any further delay to Chimp Haven in Louisiana. PETA began making preparations for the big day as Primarily Primates filed for a reconsideration, asking the Court to dismiss the case and to treat the animals as “commodities” akin to “goods in a sales contract.”

On August 30, 2006, Judge Mireles ordered both parties into settlement negotiations. PETA’s attorneys and the OSU caretakers they represented agreed to drop the suit and allow PPI to keep all the unobligated OSU money ($253,000 as of that date) if PPI would let the OSU chimpanzees go, implement a qualified board of directors, and adopt the remaining recommendations of the Master in Chancery. PPI refused to sign the settlement.

Sadly, and without explanation, on September 8, 2006, Judge Mireles dismissed the suit against PPI, rejecting the recommendation of the Master in Chancery who had initially been recommended by PPI’s attorney.

PETA will appeal the judge’s decision and go forward with other efforts to make PPI accountable for the suffering and death that it has caused. We must now work for the many other animals who exist, live—some just barely surviving—in the substandard conditions at Primarily Primates. Wally Swett, PPI’s director, is now debilitated by addictions and has become an animal hoarder. In the aftermath of our suit, and in its embarrassment, PPI’s board of directors represented that Wally Swett would step down after being given a “golden parachute.” But in his place, the board installed Stephen Rene Tello, who was at PPI when the first complaints poured in, back in 1992. Not only did he obstruct reform back then, he has also been on PPI’s board for years and has ignored the horrendous decline in the place. PPI must find new leadership, including a strong functioning board of directors complete with an enrichment specialist, a veterinarian, and a primatologist, and must evaluate the care given to all the animals in its custody, bring in veterinarians to provide medical attention to the animals, and refuse to accept any more animals until it has completed what can only be a massive clean-up and restructuring effort.

Read the “Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Permit Immediate Care for the Welfare of the Plaintiffs.”

Join Our
Activist Network

Forward to
a Friend