Los Angeles, CA — The jury’s recent $6.7 million verdict in favor of Adriana Duarte Valentines against Dedication and Everlasting Love to Animals Rescue
(D.E.L.T.A) Rescue, a no-kill animal sanctuary in Los Angeles County, has ignited a firestorm of debate, with implications extending far beyond the courtroom. The judgment, if upheld, could threaten the future of one of the nation’s most prominent nonprofit animal sanctuaries.
The Parties
Adriana Duarte Valentines, 45, is an undocumented immigrant who worked as an animal caretaker at D.E.L.T.A. Rescue from mid-2017 to early 2020. Earning $15 per hour, Duarte alleged she was wrongfully terminated and suffered discrimination due to her pregnancy. The defendant, D.E.L.T.A. Rescue, is the world’s largest “no-kill, care-for-life” animal sanctuary, housing approximately 1,500 rescue animals.
A Sanctuary at Risk
Founded in 1979 by Leo Grillo, D.E.L.T.A. Rescue operates on 115 acres in the California mountains, providing lifelong care for animals that cannot be adopted. Grillo, 75, has dedicated his life to the welfare of abandoned and abused animals, often rescuing them from remote areas where they were left to die. The sanctuary relies solely on donations and receives no government funding. A $6.7 million financial hit could jeopardize its ability to continue caring for its animals.
The Legal Battle
Duarte filed suit in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming she faced pregnancy discrimination, was denied state-mandated breaks, and was owed unpaid overtime. While the jury sided with Duarte, the sanctuary disputes these claims, arguing that Duarte never disclosed her pregnancy until after resigning in January 2020.
The Allegations:
- Witnesses testified that Duarte had allegedly stolen over $350,000 in animal food and supplies, selling them at swap meets and through illegal networks.
- Duarte reportedly engaged in relationships with coworkers during work hours, including with overnight caretaker Jorge Avalos.
- Duarte’s pregnancy became known only after she was absent for three days and called in to inquire about returning to work the next day—right after she had given birth. Prior to this, neither her supervisors nor Leo Grillo were informed of her condition, making accommodations impossible.
- During her deposition, Duarte admitted her plan was to return to work within three days after giving birth, but she did not notify anyone at the sanctuary beforehand about her pregnancy or her plans to resume work.
- Her sudden resignation was followed by a request to return, which founder Leo Grillo denied, citing concerns about theft and her job performance.
Judicial Decisions and Controversy
Additionally, edited deposition clips of Grillo’s testimony were played repeatedly for the jury, including comments that critics argue painted him in an unflattering light. According to D.E.L.T.A. Rescue’s legal team, these rulings skewed the narrative and contributed to the substantial judgment.
During the trial, Judge Kristin S. Escalante ruled that the jury could not hear evidence regarding Duarte’s alleged theft, her undocumented status, or her use of a falsified Social Security number to gain employment. In a decision that raised eyebrows, the judge also prohibited the jury from being informed that D.E.L.T.A. Rescue is a nonprofit organization dependent on donations, allowing it to be referred to only as an animal rescue. Critics argue that this omission prevented the jury from understanding the financial ramifications of their verdict on the sanctuary and the animals it supports.
Further fueling controversy, Judge Escalante reportedly referred to Leo Grillo as a “racist” in open court. This statement and the exclusion of key evidence have led D.E.L.T.A.’s legal team to assert that the trial’s proceedings were biased against the sanctuary and its founder.
Impact on the Sanctuary
With insurance covering only $1 million of the verdict, D.E.L.T.A. faces an uphill battle to meet the financial obligation without devastating its operations. Grillo has vowed to appeal, stating, “I will fight this injustice. I promised each animal they would be safe and loved for the rest of their lives.”
Animal welfare advocates are rallying behind D.E.L.T.A., concerned about the potential loss of care for the sanctuary’s inhabitants. Over 75% of the dogs at D.E.L.T.A. are Pitbulls or Pitbull mixes, many of whom arrived severely traumatized and require specialized care.
A Polarizing Verdict
The case has sparked heated debates about the intersection of illegal immigration, labor rights, and nonprofit operations. Advocates for undocumented workers hail the verdict as a victory for labor protections, while critics argue it sets a dangerous precedent for lawsuits against nonprofit organizations.
Key Questions:
- Should undocumented immigrants have standing to sue in U.S. courts?
- Why would a judge disallow critical information from the jury?
- How can nonprofits protect themselves from crippling lawsuits while adhering to labor laws?
What’s Next?
Judge Escalante will rule on post-trial motions by February, including whether to uphold or reduce the monetary award. Meanwhile, D.E.L.T.A. Rescue supporters are mobilizing to raise awareness and funds to ensure the sanctuary’s survival.
As the legal saga unfolds, the fate of D.E.L.T.A. Rescue’s 1,500 animals hangs in the balance, a poignant reminder of the high stakes in this contentious case.