Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-23776House OversightOther

Town of Palm Beach Code Enforcement Board fines dog owner over repeated attacks

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #016560
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage details a routine municipal code enforcement proceeding involving a private dog owner and local officials. It contains no connections to high‑ranking officials, major financial flows, or c Violation cited for repeated dog attacks under local ordinance. Board motion imposes $125 fine and $150 administrative costs. Recusal noted due to a relative's business relationship with the dog owne

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Tags

municipal-compliancemunicipal-proceedingscode-enforcementanimal-controllegal-exposurehouse-oversightlocal-government
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Code Enforcement Board Meeting Minutes 07/17/08 the truck he was out with had 2 other leaf blowers on the truck that he could identify as being over 65dBA but he only tested the one they were using and wrote a violation for that one. Ms. Van Buren asked about the testing method and Mr. Weymer explained how it was done. MOTION BY MR. OCHSTEIN TO FIND THE VIOLATOR IN NON- COMPLIANCE, ASSESS ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $150.00 AND ORDER HIM TO PAY THE $125.00 FINE SECONDED BY MS. VAN BUREN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY K. Case # 08-2520, 165 Brazilian Ave., Richard Lynn Violation of Chapter 10, Section 10-45 (i) of the Town of Palm Beach Code of Ordinances, if any dog attacks and causes severe injury or death to any human or domestic animal more than once, the owner shall be required to have said dog removed from the Town or humanely euthanized at his/her sole expense and violation of Chapter 10, Section 10-6 of the Code which prohibits animals from creating nuisances which are detrimental to the public safety and welfare. (Mr. Ochstein recused himself, stating that he has a relative who has a business relationship with Dr. Lynn and Mr. Hoffman advised Mr. Vanneck would be a voting member in this case) Sgt. Curtis Krauel said this case was brought to Code Enforcement through a culmination of events spanning back over a period of 4 years. Sgt. Krauel explained Section 10-6 of the Code and said he was going to be showing some graphic photographs. Sgt. Krauel presented the facts of each of the documented cases involving attacks by Duke from March 17, 2004 until May 11, 2008. Mr. Hoffman questioned how the Code Enforcement Board came into this procedure since the Town Council had already said Duke is a dangerous dog. Mr. Randolph explained that Town Council does not have the authority to fine. Originally, the police department did not issue a code enforcement board citation but ordered the dog be removed from the Town or humanely euthanized which was appealed to Town Council. Town Council denied the appeal. Since that time, Dr. Lynn has refused to comply with the order of the Town Council so a citation was issued by Code Enforcement to bring the matter before the Board to determine whether there should be a finding of violation and at a later time, whether a fine should be imposed. Mr. Randolph said it was now the jurisdiction of the Code Enforcement Board and not the Town Council. Mr. Hoffman questioned whether or not the Board had to determine if the dog was going to be euthanized or removed from the Town and Mr. Randolph explained that this was not the Board’s determination. The Board was only to determine whether or not there had been a violation of the Town Code.

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.