🔥 Clark County Animal Control: A Criminal Enterprise Hiding Behind a Badge! 🔥
💰 They STEAL your money. They BREAK the law. They have NO oversight. 💰
Clark County Animal Control is operating like a mafia—illegally issuing fines, abusing their power, and running a corrupt system where they answer to NO ONE.
🚨 Jim Andersen sits at the top, pretending he doesn’t know his department is VIOLATING STATE & FEDERAL LAW. His lieutenants run unchecked, acting as judge, jury, and executioner over innocent pet owners. 🚨
💥 THIS ENDS NOW! 💥
👉 EXPOSE THEIR CRIMES | DEMAND REFUNDS | JOIN THE LAWSUIT 👈
About Us – Exposing Clark County Animal Control’s Corruption
Clark County Animal Control has been stealing from the citizens of Clark County for too long. They abuse their power, issue fraudulent citations, and operate like a legalized extortion ring, shaking down responsible pet owners for money under the guise of "enforcement." This ends now.
We are a relentless force—a group of citizens who have had enough of their corruption, deception, and blatant disregard for the law. This website is a rallying point for their victims.
🔴 We are exposing their misconduct.
🔴 We are collecting evidence.
🔴 We are demanding refunds and justice.
🔴 And if enough of us stand together, we will take them to court.
Clark County Animal Control thinks they can operate in the shadows, abusing their authority with no consequences. They’re wrong. Every stolen dollar, every unjustified fine, every family they have targeted will now be part of the evidence against them. We will hold them accountable.
If you’ve been targeted by these corrupt officials, join us. Submit your story, connect with other victims, and help build the case that will bring their abuse to light.
We are watching. We are fighting. And we will win.
👉 Share Your Story. Demand Justice. Hold Them Accountable.
Clark County Animal Control's use of Section 1.14.010 to issue administrative citations
The Law Was NOT Meant for Animal Control
Clark County Code Section 1.14.010 is a general penalty provision that applies to several titles, including Title 10 (Animals). However:
- Nowhere in Title 10 does it explicitly grant Animal Control the authority to issue administrative citations under 1.14.010.
- Section 1.14.010 was never intended for Animal Control officers—it was designed for other county enforcement agencies.
- If Clark County wanted Animal Control to have administrative citation power, the law would specifically state that.
2. Violation of Due Process & Conflict of Interest
- Clark County Animal Control Officers serve as both accuser and judge, violating the Nevada Administrative Procedure Act (NRS 233B) and due process rights under Mathews v. Eldridge (1976).
- If they issue a fine AND oversee their own appeals, that’s a clear conflict of interest.
3. Lack of State Authorization
- Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) do NOT grant animal control officers the power to issue administrative citations.
- If state law does not authorize it, Clark County cannot create new powers for itself.
WHAT WE OFFER
🔴 A Platform to Share Your Story
- Expose the corruption. Submit your experience and connect with others who have been targeted by Clark County Animal Control.
🔴 Legal Resources & Guidance
- Learn how to fight back against unfair citations, request refunds, and protect yourself from further harassment.
🔴 Public Awareness & Exposure
- We are collecting evidence, publishing real cases, and making sure the public knows about these fraudulent practices.
🔴 Strength in Numbers – The Class Action Lawsuit
- If enough victims come forward, we will take legal action. Clark County Animal Control will be forced to answer for their misconduct in court.
🔴 Justice & Accountability
- We are not backing down. These officials will feel the consequences of their actions—financially, legally, and in the court of public opinion.
👉 If you’ve been a victim, don’t stay silent. Share your story. Take action. Demand justice.
The Truth About Clark County Animal Control
Clark County Animal Control is operating outside the law. They issue administrative citations, even though neither Nevada law nor Clark County code grants them that power. They act as if they have unchecked authority, but in reality, they are breaking state law every time they fine a pet owner. This is fraud—plain and simple.
How They Get Away With It
They control both the accusations and the appeals process. That’s illegal. Nevada law prohibits any agency from acting as both the prosecutor and the judge in a financial dispute. Clark County Animal Control issues fines and then allows their own officers to act as hearing officers in appeals—a direct financial conflict of interest. This is a clear violation of due process, and it will be part of our lawsuit.
Fighting Back – Know Your Rights
The law is on your side—they just don’t want you to know it.
- Nevada law does NOT give Clark County Animal Control the right to issue administrative citations.
- Clark County Code does NOT grant them this power either.
- They CANNOT be the hearing officers in a case where they have a financial interest.
If you were fined, you have legal grounds to challenge it—and we will show you how. The more people who fight back, the weaker their illegal operation becomes.
The Lawsuit – Time for Payback
We are not just exposing Clark County Animal Control—we are suing them for their illegal actions. Their citations are unlawful, their appeals process is rigged, and their entire operation is built on deception. This lawsuit will demand refunds, dismantle their corrupt system, and force legal accountability. If you were fined, you may be owed compensation. Join us and take back what’s yours.
Real Stories – Victims Speak Out
People have been fined without cause, harassed at their homes, and threatened into paying unlawful fees. Every stolen dollar was taken under false legal pretenses. This section highlights real victims who have been affected—and every testimony adds fuel to the legal fire we are building against them. If you’ve been targeted, share your story. Your voice strengthens our case.
Join the Fight – Hold Them Accountable
Clark County Animal Control thinks they are above the law—but their power is built on lies. The truth is, they lack the legal authority to issue administrative citations, and their hearing process is unlawful. This lawsuit is their reckoning. If you’ve been affected, now is the time to fight back. Submit your story, learn your rights, and stand with us as we take legal action.
Legal Violations and Case Law Supporting Our Lawsuit Against Clark County Animal Control
1. Unauthorized Issuance of Administrative Citations
Legal Framework:
Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 574: This chapter outlines the authority of animal control officers, primarily focusing on the prevention of cruelty to animals. It does not explicitly grant the power to issue administrative citations. leg.state.nv.us
Clark County Code Section 1.14.010: While this section provides for the issuance of administrative citations for county code violations, it does not specifically authorize animal control officers to issue such citations. clarkcountynv.gov
Implication: The lack of explicit authorization in both state and local laws suggests that Clark County Animal Control may be exceeding its legal authority by issuing administrative citations.
2. Conflict of Interest in Administrative Hearings
Legal Framework:
Nevada Administrative Procedure Act (NRS Chapter 233B): This act requires impartiality in administrative hearings, prohibiting individuals with a direct interest in the outcome from serving as hearing officers.
Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.11: This rule addresses conflicts of interest for current and former government officers and employees, emphasizing the need for impartiality. leg.state.nv.us
Relevant Case Law:
- Commission on Ethics v. Hardy: This case underscores the importance of disclosing conflicts of interest to maintain the integrity of administrative proceedings. law.justia.com
Implication: Allowing animal control officers, who have a vested interest in the enforcement outcomes, to act as hearing officers violates principles of due process and impartiality.
3. Due Process Violations
Legal Framework:
- NRS Chapter 622A: This chapter outlines procedures for administrative hearings, emphasizing the right to a fair and impartial hearing. ag.nv.gov
Relevant Case Law:
- Palmieri v. Clark County: This case highlights issues related to administrative actions by Clark County, emphasizing the need for adherence to due process. law.justia.com+7nvbar.org+7files.lasvegasnevada.gov+7
Implication: The current practices of Clark County Animal Control may infringe upon individuals' due process rights by not providing fair and impartial hearings.
Conclusion
The practices of Clark County Animal Control, including the unauthorized issuance of administrative citations and the use of interested parties as hearing officers, raise significant legal concerns. These actions appear to violate both state statutes and established case law, underscoring the need for legal action to protect the rights of Clark County residents.
National Case Law
Lo1. SEC v. Jarkesy (2022)
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) use of administrative proceedings to impose civil penalties violated the defendant's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. The court emphasized that certain enforcement actions must be tried in federal courts before Article III judges, not merely before administrative law judges. naag.org+5mofo.com+5supremecourt.gov+5
Implication: This case underscores the necessity of proper judicial processes in enforcement actions, reinforcing the argument that Clark County Animal Control's administrative citations may bypass constitutionally required procedures.
2. Mathews v. Eldridge (1976)
The U.S. Supreme Court established a three-part test to determine the requirements of procedural due process:
The private interest affected by the official action.
The risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value of additional or substitute procedural safeguards.law.justia.com
The government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that additional procedural requirements would entail.
Implication: Applying this test suggests that Clark County Animal Control's current procedures may inadequately protect individuals' rights, indicating potential due process violations.
3. Tumey v. Ohio (1927)
The U.S. Supreme Court held that it violates due process when a judge has a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against a defendant in their case.
Implication: If Clark County Animal Control officers, who benefit financially from fines, also serve as hearing officers in disputes over those fines, it presents a clear conflict of interest, violating due process principles.
4. Gibson v. Berryhill (1973)
The Supreme Court found that a state board composed of private practitioners, who stood to gain from the revocation of licenses of competing practitioners, was unconstitutionally biased.
Implication: This case reinforces that adjudicators must be impartial, without personal or financial interests that could bias their decisions.
Meet Jim Andersen: The Ghost Leader of Clark County Animal Control
The man at the top who takes no responsibility. As the Chief of Public Response, Andersen hands off all decisions to his lieutenants, allowing unchecked corruption and lawbreaking to run rampant. If he actually did his job, he’d realize his department is violating state and federal law. Instead, he turns a blind eye, making him just as guilty as those carrying out the dirty work
Contact Us – Hold Clark County Animal Control Accountable
Have you been targeted by Clark County Animal Control? Have you received an illegal citation, faced harassment, or been forced to pay an unfair fine? You are not alone.
🚨 This is your chance to fight back. Share your story, connect with other victims, and join the legal action to expose their corruption.
📩 Contact Us Securely
🔴 Submit Your Testimony – Use the form below to document your experience. You can remain anonymous if you choose.
🔴 Join the Lawsuit – If you want legal representation, let us know. The more voices we have, the stronger our case.
🔴 Media & Legal Inquiries – Journalists, attorneys, and whistleblowers are welcome to reach out.
Clark County Animal Control has operated in the shadows for too long—illegally fining pet owners, violating due process, and abusing their power with zero oversight. We are here to expose their corruption, fight back against their unlawful actions, and demand justice for every victim they’ve targeted.
🚨 We won’t be silenced. 🚨 This site is a platform for those who have been wronged, a rallying point for legal action, and a warning to those in power: We see you. We have the evidence. And we will hold you accountable.
💥 Join the fight. Share your story. Demand justice. 💥
🔥 File a Complaint with the Nevada Attorney General – Demand Justice! 🔥
🚨 Clark County Animal Control is breaking the law, and it’s time for the Nevada Attorney General to take action. If you’ve been targeted, fined, or harassed by this corrupt system, file an official complaint NOW. The more people who come forward, the harder it will be for them to ignore.
📢 Submit Your Complaint Here:
👉 Nevada Attorney General Consumer Complaint Form 👈
📞 Prefer to Call? Nevada AG’s Office: (775) 684-1100
📩 Email Your Complaint: AgInfo@ag.nv.gov
🔴 What to Include in Your Complaint:
✔️ Your name & contact info (optional if you prefer to stay anonymous)
✔️ Details of the illegal citation or harassment you faced
✔️ How much money you were forced to pay
✔️ Why you believe Clark County Animal Control violated the law
✔️ Any supporting documents (citations, emails, appeal rejections, etc.)
💥 Clark County Animal Control is about to be under serious scrutiny. Let’s make sure the Attorney General’s office can’t ignore what’s happening.
File your complaint NOW and take back your rights! ⚖️🔥
Concerned Citizens of Clark County, Nevada
Our Mission: Justice, Accountability, and the End of Corruption
©2025 Copyright. All rights reserved.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details in the privacy policy and accept the service to view the translations.