The tragic incidents involving a well-known squirrel may jeopardize an extraordinary $10 million settlement claim against New York State.
Mark Longo and Daniela Bittner, the owners of P’Nut and his raccoon companion Fred, have filed a lawsuit alleging damages related to the death of their pet due to the actions of state investigators. The lawsuit was submitted on Thursday in New York State Court of Claims.
A large group of officers and agents from the state’s Environmental Protection and Health Department conducted a raid on their Upstate Pine City Animal Sanctuary on October 30.
The couple claims they have faced emotional distress and financial hardship since the death of Starlis, a pet that had gained significant online fame, according to the lawsuit.
In New York, keeping squirrels and raccoons as pets is illegal, as they are classified as wild animals.
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) officials alleged that P’Nut bit one of their agents through thick leather gloves during the operation.
Even though subsequent rabies tests returned negative results, the state did not issue an apology or recover the remains of either animal.
According to new court documents, the killings of P’Nut and Fred were “not motivated by concerns over rabies.” Instead, they describe it as “a senseless act of violence” and an “indecent display of governmental overreach,” listing DEC and the Department of Health (DOH) as defendants.
This claim echoes details from another lawsuit filed on June 27 by Longo and Bittner against the county, Elmira city, and various local governments, targeting 36 individuals in the Chemung County Supreme Court.
The second lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, slated for resolution in a trial.
As of this week, lawsuits in state courts are required to specify the damages being claimed.
Both lawsuits outline the couple’s ongoing emotional pain and financial losses since the passing of Starlis, who had become a social media sensation, appearing in various posts and monetized content.
A spokesperson for the DOH indicated that the department would not comment on ongoing legal matters, while the DEC did not respond to requests for comment.
