cases

Some of Bryan's current pending cases include:

  • Von Markgraf German Shepherds

Bryan is suing an illegal, unpermitted "bite dog" business operating on vacant land in the outskirts of Barstow, California, and the San Bernardino County Sheriff for retaliating against animal rescuers for exposing them. Click here for more details.

  • San Diego NAACP v. San Diego Sheriff William Gore (S.D. Cal. Case No. 3:16-cv-02575-JLS-MSB)

Bryan is representing 10 community members who were falsely arrested when El Cajon Police illegally declared an "unlawful assembly" on a peaceful prayer vigil mourning the police killing of Alfred Olango, and San Diego Sheriffs enforced the illegal order by dispersing and arresting anyone who refused to leave.

Status: Discovery complete, defeated multiple motions to dismiss, summary judgment motions about to be filed.

  • Cervantes v. San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman (S.D. Cal. Case No. 3:17-cv-1230-BAS-AHG)

Bryan is representing four individuals and himself in a civil rights case against San Diego Police and Sheriff's Department for forcing peaceful anti-Trump protesters to walk a mile along Harbor Drive from the Convention Center to Barrio Logan--while sealing off all avenues of escape--before falsely arresting Bryan and the others for no reason, while allowing pro-Trump demonstrators to remain engaging in hate speech outside the Convention Center.

Status: Discovery complete, defeated multiple motions to dismiss, summary judgment motions pending.

  • San Diego NAACP v. San Diego Housing Commission (San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2019-00012582-CU-WM-CTL)

Bryan is part of a legal team suing the San Diego Housing Commission for racial steering and segregation in its Section 8 program on behalf of San Diego NAACP, San Diego Tenant Union, and voucher holders. Lead counsel is Parisa Ijadi-Maghsoodi, Esq. of Disability Rights California, a separate law firm. There is also a related Public Records Act case regarding records the agency is unlawfully withholding in order to hide its discriminatory actions, as the agency improperly removed the original case to federal court to delay being compelled to respond to discovery.

Status: Defeated multiple frivolous motions filed by the San Diego Housing Commission--including one in which the agency absurdly claimed that its CEO's statements repeatedly referring to anti-segregation policies as "social engineering" were somehow protected free speech that could not be referenced in the lawsuit--causing the agency to improperly remove the case to federal court to avoid pending sanctions motions against it and its attorneys. Plaintiffs' motion to remand the case back to state court has been pending since March.

  • PetConnect Rescue, Inc. v. Pet Connect Rescue, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Southern District of California)

Bryan is representing Maryland-based PetConnect Rescue, Inc., a nonprofit animal shelter and rescue organization, against a fake rescue called Pet Connect Rescue, Inc. in Missouri, which was set up by Ray and Alysia Rothman specifically to launder puppy mill puppies from Brian Mohrfeld's Select Puppies, Inc. in Iowa to pet stores around the country and fraudulently sell them as "rescues." The real PetConnect Rescue is suing for violation of its tradename.

Status: Defeated multiple motions to dismiss. Discovery is about to begin.

  • Animal Protection and Rescue League v. Salinas (San Diego Superior Court)
         Animal Protection and Rescue League v. Ramirez (San Diego Superior Court)
         Companion Animal Protection Society v. Salinas (San Diego Superior Court)
         Companion Animal Protection Society v. Puppies4Less (Riverside Superior Court)
         Matias v. Salinas (U.S. District Court, Central District of CA)

Bryan has several pending cases in state and federal court on behalf of nonprofits and defrauded customers of puppy stores fraudulently claiming to sell "rescues" in order to evade a 2019 California law.

Status: obtained four injunctions shutting down all 10 remaining stores. Now pursuing the owners for damages, who are continuing to operate in other states.

  • Animal Protection and Rescue League v. Wag! (Los Angeles Superior Court)

Bryan is suing the Wag! dog walking app company for pairing random strangers up with people's dogs to walk them, while falsely claiming the walkers are screened, trained, bonded and insured, with predictably horrific results, including a slow, older dog being killed by a car in a crosswalk as the walker strolled more quickly ahead not paying attention.

Status: Wag!'s motion to compel arbitration is pending.

  • Burghardt v. Yvon (San Bernardino Superior Court)

Bryan is defending a free speech case against a former client of Companion Pet Care, Inc. and James Burghardt, DVM, whose negligence caused major burns to the defendant's dog during a routine spay/neuter, yet Burghardt and the clinic are now suing the former client for defamation for posting a negative Yelp review.

Status: Case is expected to be dismissed as a SLAPP suit (strategic litigation against public participation).

  • Animal Protection and Rescue League v. Wonderland OB (San Diego Superior Court)

Bryan is suing Wonderland Ocean Beach for falsely passing off some type of bad-tasting, house-made bean patty as the iconic Impossible Burger, which was likely to turn people off to vegetarian options.

Status: Awaiting trial date.

  • Yu v. Hoose (San Bernardino Superior Court)

Bryan substituted into this veterinary malpractice case when it became a free speech case requiring defense of a cross-complaint filed by California Veterinary Specialists against their former clients whose dog Jennifer Hoose, DVM negligently killed. CVS and Hoose are counter-suing their former clients to try to block introduction of evidence of Hoose's wrongdoing.

Status: Special motion to strike pursuant to California's anti-SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) statute pending on appeal.

  • Locke v. Six Flags (Solano Superior Court)

Bryan is representing two elderly women who were protesting cruel confinement of wild animals at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom in Vallejo, California, when an on-duty, uniformed security guard instructed an angry park patron to drive his F-150 pickup truck onto the sidewalk and plow over the protest signs, almost hitting one of the women.

Status: Defeated multiple demurrers and summary judgment motions filed by all defendants. Six Flags remains liable for violating California civil rights statutes, which will require payment of attorneys' fees. Case headed to trial.

  • Davies v. Riverside Sheriff's Department (Riverside Superior Court)

Bryan is representing an activist who was threatened with arrest by a Riverside Sheriff's Deputy for peacefully protesting outside a puppy store in a mall in Riverside. The mall already settled and paid attorneys' fees for its unconstitutional free speech policy, and the illegal puppy store has been shut down.

Status: Defeated the county's demurrer. Case is ongoing.