506 before the trial court, which again dismissed AO petition for evaluation. In reviewing the trial courtroom’s decision, the Superior Court discovered that the trial court dedicated multiple errors of law. This court found that AO supplied sufficient proof to show prima facie instances of neglect, cruelty, and aggravated cruelty with respect to the incidents. The courtroom then analyzed whether or not the record supported a defense of “regular agricultural operations” defense that would counter the charges. This court discovered that incidents like the dehorning of cattle that already had horns fused to the skull and extreme tail twisting and shocking have been sufficient to overcome the affirmative protection. The trial courtroom’s dismissal of AO’s petition for evaluate was reversed and the trial court was ordered to direct the DA to accept and transmit costs for prosecution.

Lead Counsel independently verifies attorneys by conferring with state bar associations and conducting …