The long-running legal dispute between Maryanne (“Annie”) Hornish and the Town of Suffield (later amended to include Connecticut’s Department of Agriculture as a second Defendant) is closer to conclusion. The case arose out of the tragic death of Janet D’Aleo on November 6, 2019, in the Hornish’s home while she was visiting Annie Hornish’s mother.
It was clear that the Hornish’s dog, who had been with them since June 2019, was involved in the incident, and Ryan Selig, the town’s animal control officer, issued a quarantine order for the dog that day. In November of that year, he issued a “disposal order.” The Hornish family appealed to the Agriculture Department, resulting
in a hearing presided over by Bruce Sherman, who served as the final decision maker.
As is generally the case there are often factual “disputes” during litigation, and the typical legal process involves a “factfinder”, in this case Sherman, determining “the facts”. Those facts are generally deemed “the facts” of the case and relied upon during subsequent appeals. Therefore, they are likewise referred to in this article as “facts”, although presumably some may dispute the correctness of such factual determinations.
An administrative hearing was held on June 2 and 4, 2020 during which the parties introduced documentary evidence and presented testimony. On October 20, 2020, it issued a proposed final decision, recommending affirming the disposal order, subsequently confirmed in a final order on December 21, 2020.
These facts as found included the critical determinations that during the November 2019 visit the Hornish’s dog, unprovoked, attacked and bit D’Aleo numerous times, resulting in her death. (Annie Hornish was not home at the time the attack began but returned home at some point during the incident.)
The Hornishes appealed to the Superior Court. Largely bound by the facts as determined, the claims now involved constitutional claims and that the hearings were unfairly conducted.
On November 13, 2023, the Superior Court issued a decision that the statute was constitutional and rejected all other challenges, dismissing the Hornish’s administrative appeal. Another appeal was filed, this time to the state’s Court of Appeals. On July 29, 2025 the Court of Appeals rejected all the claims and upheld
the prior orders.
While it is unclear if the plaintiffs will seek to appeal to the Connecticut Supreme Court, even if an appeal is taken, it is within the discretion of the Supreme Court whether they wish to hear the appeal or deny the appeal and bind the parties to the Court of Appeals decision.
The ruling comes just several months after a state Superior Court judge ordered the Hornishes to pay more than $76, 000 to the town for outstanding boarding fees.
Since 2022, the town has covered the cost of boarding the dog.