Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
On March 7th, my husband Marty spoke with Kevin Usilton at the SPCA. He was told that
they would take back Ayoki and refund the cost adoption fees and reimburse the
veterinarian fees. My husband told him that we would get back to him. Later that
afternoon I called the SPCA to speak with Kevin Usilton. He was not available and I was
told he would get back to me later. He never called back that day.
On March 8th in the morning, I was called by Kevin Usilton. I told him that I would no
longer speak with him on the phone. I also told him that all correspondences are to be
either by e-mail or writing. He said fine and hung up.
On March 9th, I spoke with Cheswolds chief of police; he told me that he thought it would
be next to impossible for Mr. Usilton to get a search warrant issued. He also believes that
the KCSPCA has no legal rights to the dog since I have adoption papers.
------------I have been informed (by an employee of SPCA) that Mr. Usilton intends to file a civil suit
against me. I understand that he fired the young woman who processed the adoption.
I was also informed that, despite Corp. Hulses statements, Ayokis sister is not suffering
from depression and in danger of dying; he was lying to me.
I have done nothing wrong and do not believe that the young woman who processed the
adoption did, either. She was not the only SPCA employee at the desk, and everyone
seemed to understand that one of the dogs getting a home was preferable to neither of them
being adopted.
If Mr. Usilton persists in sending animal control officers to my home to take Ayoka back, I
will again call the Delaware State Police, as is my right.
Secretary Kee, I am on disability with ARD (Acute Respiratory Disorder) and my doctor
adivses that stressful situations are to be avoided. Needless to say, this is a stressful
situation. I would appreciate hearing from you regarding these actions by the director
and animal control officers of the KCSPCA.
UPDATE 4/16/12: Kevin Usilton also fired the adoption manager, then gave the young
woman who processed the paperwork her job back. He has issued a summons to Ms.
Baker for JP Court 16 for May 10, 2013.
UPDATE 5/18/12: Patty Foltz talked to Ron Poliquin, atty, who agreed to talk to Patty
Baker, and ended up agreeing to represent her.
At court 5/10, KU tried to argue that it was in the animals best interest to be re-united
with its sibling. Judge pointed out that by law, pets are property and he could not
consider that argument. Judge and Mr. Poliquin established that the adoption contract
was signed for by the KCSPCA and the contract was written by the KCSPCA and only
specified one animal. KU tried to argue that the 3-day clause for prior owner asking for
animal back kicked in, KCSPCA was prior owner. Was told that was clearly for the owner
of a stray or the owner who relinquished the animal. KU tried to argue that the dog was
taken to the vet withing 5 days of adoption because it was sick (implying that, like its
sibling, was grieving); Attorney offered vet records showing it was an ear infection (and
contract calls for adopter to take animal to vet within that time frame). Judge dismissed
case in favor of Ms. Baker and gave a 5 minute recess for KU to decide what he wanted to
do (oh, Whipple and Hulse were there coaching him the whole time); KU tried to argue
that clause in contract said dog could not be allowed to be lonely and her dog was lonely;
Judge asked how he knew that; KU said ACO was denied access to home, atty pointed out
ACO was denied access because he was trying to reclaim animal, NOT check on its welfare;
bottom line, couldnt prove dog was lonely, dismissal in favor of defendant stood. Atty
asked for Rule 11 hearing for penalties and sanctions, because suit was brought in bad
faith and in retaliation for Ms. Baker contacting her elected officials. To be scheduled.
NOTE: As the writer of these updates, I was present in court for this hearing (along with
KCLC COmm. Jody Sweeney, Carol Furr, and Doug Beatty) and contact Ms. Baker directly
for her information.
UPDATE 5/24 & 25/12: Mr. Poliquin gave the KCSPCA 20 days to accept the out-of-court
settlement (May 30); Ms. Baker has not heard from either Mr. Poliquin or the KCSPCA.
The No Kill DE Elite Blocked Club FB page is posting a version of this story making Ms.
Baker the bad guy and KCSPCA the good guy. We have had a report that the Board
and Mr. Usilton are aware of the FB posts; in fact, Mr. Usilton has a FB page.