Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates Appealing Texas Court Ruling

Share Article

Cummins reported Amanda Lollar of Bat World Sanctuary to authorities for alleged animal cruelty and animal neglect. She posted her reports and public documents online and was in turn sued for defamation, Bat World Sanctuary v Mary Cummins case # 352-248169-10. Substitute Judge William Brigham ruled in favor of Plaintiffs. Cummins is appealing this ruling.

Everything I stated about Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary is 100% the truth backed up with facts and physical evidence.

Mary Cummins, a licensed wildlife rehabilitator in Los Angeles, California reported Amanda Lollar of Bat World Sanctuary in Mineral Wells, Texas for alleged animal cruelty, animal neglect and health code violations. Cummins posted her findings on her website AnimalAdvocates.us.

In Cummins' appeal she stated the items in question were results of Freedom of Information Act posted requests on her website. She posted complaints and reports made by others about Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary.

Cummins also stated in her appeal that she posted reports bat experts had made questioning Lollar's procedures on her website. Lollar recommended freezing bats to death in her original manual which is inhumane according to the American Veterinary Medication Association Guidelines on Euthanasia.

Judge William Brigham will soon sign an order to force Cummins to remove items from her website and others. Judge Brigham stated in court "a permanent injunction on the items Plaintiffs' 17 and 18." The items in Exhibit 17 are the results of information act requests. The order will also include Exhibit 18 which are items written by others posted on websites owned by others who were not a party to the action.

Cummins stated, "the order as stated would be overly broad. I am the only named defendant. As per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65 (d) the court cannot force me to remove items written by third parties on websites I don't control. It's ludicrous to think that I am being held liable for supposed defamation written and posted by others on other people's websites."

Cummins has filed an appeal, alleging that the Plaintiffs did not show the essential elements for a claim of defamation or breach of contract in court.

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Mary Cummins
Visit website