A district court judge was set to decide whether to dismiss a lawsuit against the City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville Police Department by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) this week, but the hearing was abruptly canceled. PETA sued the city and FPD in October for refusing to release public records relating to an incident last summer in which a Fayetteville police officer was recorded punching his K-9 in the face.
The case was set for a hearing Monday, but the city asked to withdraw because of scheduling conflicts, according to court documents, and it was canceled.
PETA’s original complaint asks the court to compel the city to provide the public records PETA asked for and pay for any attorneys’ fees it incurred as a result of the litigation. Here’s a timeline of the K-9 incident and ongoing legal dispute.
Overview of K-9 incident
On June 23, 2024, a bystander captured a 30-second video of a Fayetteville police officer punching his K-9 in the face several times, and then lifting and dragging the K-9 by its collar towards the police car. The video immediately drew widespread public outrage, and animal behavior experts previously described the incident to CityView as animal cruelty and abuse.
The incident occurred after a traffic stop where the K-9 was ordered to sniff the stopped vehicle, the Fayetteville Police Department said in a statement last July, following an internal investigation into the interaction. In the weeks that followed, FPD “received numerous complaints and comments expressing concerns about the incident,” the department said in the statement. FPD also said the “seven” punches were prompted by the K-9 biting the officer on the thigh for “10–12 seconds.”
Complaint
PETA made three public records requests related to the K-9 incident through the city’s online public records request portal in July, August and September of last year, and alleged that FPD broke public records law by not providing or by redacting certain requested information. In the lawsuit, PETA alleges that the FPD violated North Carolina public records law by refusing to provide:
- The names of the K-9 and the K-9 handler officer recorded in the incident and a history of the officer’s appointment, promotions, demotions, transfers and suspensions at FPD.
- The names of the all FPD officers employed as K-9 handlers since January 2023 and their changes in positions at the police department (e.g., promotions, demotions, transfers and suspensions).
- “Identifying information for the K9 dogs — including such information as the color and age of a dog — and handlers.” These were redacted in the training certificates, training records and veterinary records received by PETA.
The police department initially refused to provide any of these records, stating that “personnel records are not public records as it pertains to these officers” in the public records portal. The city later provided some of the records after PETA’s attorney emailed the city attorney, but redacted the names of the dogs and the officers in the documents, the lawsuit states. The documents with redactions are attached to the complaint.
PETA argued that the requested records are not confidential and are thus public records, according to N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A-168.
“Defendants have not objected to the plaintiff’s requests for documents and information,” the complaint states. “Defendants have merely asserted an exclusion without merit and redacted nonconfidential information without an explanation.”
Response
The City of Fayetteville and FPD responded to the complaint on Dec. 18, 2024 with a motion to dismiss. City attorneys alleged the case should be dismissed because:
- PETA did not comply with a North Carolina law that states that public records disputes should be filed in the superior court in the county where they take place.
- The Fayetteville Police Department is part of the City of Fayetteville and cannot be sued separately. The case should be brought against the City of Fayetteville and not include FPD.
- The case was filed in the Cumberland County District Court instead of the Superior Court, which is the proper court for this type of claim.
The city and FPD denied the allegations that they broke public records law. The defendants also claimed they are protected from liability in the case by governmental and sovereign immunity — legal doctrines that shield government entities from being sued in certain types of civil suits.
“Defendants contend that all public records responsive to Plaintiff’s request and required by North Carolina public records laws to be provided have been produced,” the motion to dismiss states. “Defendants have complied in good faith with all applicable laws and regulations and, having so complied, acted without improper motive and any injury accruing to Plaintiff, the existence of which is specifically denied, is not actionable.”
The hearing initially set for March 3 has not yet been rescheduled.
Contact Evey Weisblat at eweisblat@cityviewnc.com or 216-527-3608. This story was made possible by donations from readers like you to CityView News Fund, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization committed to an informed democracy in Fayetteville and Cumberland County.
