Kingston man loses appeal over removal of 33 Boston terriers

Editor's Note: This article contains disturbing descriptions of animals in distress.

A Kingston man’s appeal to regain custody of 33 Boston terriers seized by Animal Welfare Services (AWS) last year has been denied, due to what authorities described as “severe neglect and hazardous living conditions.”

AWS removed the dogs from the Kingston residence of Joshua LaPointe following an inspection on November 26, 2024. The inspection determined that he failed to comply with two separate orders issued in October 2024 that mandated improvements to the animals' living conditions, as well as veterinary care. On Friday, Mar. 28, 2025, Tribunals Ontario’s Animal Care Review Board denied LaPointe’s appeal of the removal, following a hearing by video conference on January 13, January 14, and February 6, 2025. LaPointe was self-represented at the hearing. The Animal Care Review Board upheld AWS’s decision in its ruling, finding that the dogs were in distress and required removal for their well-being.

Disturbing conditions

AWS inspector Christina Haaima testified that she first investigated LaPointe’s home in August 2024 after receiving complaints about the dogs' conditions. She further testified that despite multiple attempts over several weeks, LaPointe would not grant entry to inspect the dogs' living conditions.

Finally gaining access through a warrant, the inspector testified that upon entering the residence on the morning of October 10, 2024, she observed one Boston terrier-type dog, later identified as Lincoln, on a couch. Lincoln had several open lacerations and wounds, a protruding left eye, and thinning fur on the paws and legs.

Haaima further testified that many Boston terrier-type dogs of various colours, ages, and sexes were housed "in the small attic/loft space" of the residence; some were crated, and others were roaming free.

Haaima observed “unsanitary and hazardous conditions,” including urine-soaked floors, creating “high ammonia smell levels that caused a burning sensation in her eyes, nose and throat and made it difficult to breathe, inadequate bedding and excessive fecal accumulation in the dog crates, inadequate lighting, no potable water available for the dogs, inadequately sized crates, three litters of puppies, and four to six dogs with ocular issues involving cloudy or bulging eyes.”

She issued an order to LaPointe, Haaima said, directing him to have Lincoln assessed and treated by a veterinarian by 4 p.m. that same day. He was also to take action to rectify the unacceptable living conditions for the dogs and their health concerns, with a compliance date of 10 a.m. on October 22, 2024. This included having the dogs with ocular issues assessed and treated by a veterinarian; having all pregnant, lactating, and nursing adult dogs and all puppies under the age of eight weeks seen by a veterinarian for external parasite treatment; and providing veterinarian-grade flea treatment to the rest of the dogs. LaPointe was also required to provide all the animals with adequate potable water, appropriate exercise, and safe, sanitary housing conditions.

Inspector Haaima testified that on October 17, 2024, at LaPointe's request, she gave him more time to comply with the veterinary requirements. 

After more visits to the residence with no compliance evident, Haaima testified, AWS executed a search warrant on November 26, 2024. Accompanying Haaima from AWS were senior investigator Joshua Matson, inspector Eric Goettling and regional veterinarian Dr. Kyle Goldie.

Dr. Goldie was qualified as an expert witness in small animal veterinary medicine for the hearing and provided his expert opinion regarding the dogs' health conditions and observations during his inspection of the residence's attic area on November 26, 2024. 

Dr. Goldie testified about his clinical findings from the triage examination he performed on the dogs after their removal. Several dogs exhibited severe medical issues, including ocular diseases likely caused by chronic ammonia exposure and trauma. Some dogs had untreated wounds likely caused by fighting, while others showed signs of malnutrition and parasite infestations. 

Dr. Stephanie Dam was also qualified as an expert witness in small animal veterinary medicine for the hearing. She provided her expert opinion based on examinations of the dogs on November 27, 2024. She testified that she examined 27 dogs (22 adults and 5 puppies). Most had chronic eye conditions due to poor hygiene, overcrowding, and lack of veterinary care. Inbreeding and neglect contributed to these issues, according to the doctor.

She noted that many adult dogs had scars and wounds on their heads and limbs, likely caused by repeated fighting over food and territory, worsened by intact males and females being housed together. Some injuries had been present for months, Dr. Dam said, noting she observed that the dogs had poor coat quality, strong ammonia odours, and fecal staining, suggesting prolonged exposure to urine and feces. Many had severely overgrown nails, with some so long that they impaired movement.

She noted that four of five puppies exhibited congenital defects, likely due to inbreeding. Puppies also suffered from severe parasitic infections, indicating improper deworming.

Dr. Dam dismissed LaPointe’s claims that over-the-counter medications were adequate for eye care or deworming; she emphasized that prescription treatments were necessary. She attributed the dogs’ conditions to neglect and overcrowding.

According to Dr. Dam, all dogs improved after removal, with some requiring routine veterinary care and surgical procedures. Some required eye removal to alleviate pain. 

Failure to comply with orders

During the appeal hearing, LaPointe’s father, Joshua Campbell LaPointe, testified about the level of care his son provided to the dogs. He said that his son looked after his dogs, did not mistreat them, fed them, and cleaned up when the dogs relieved themselves on the floor. He also testified that he did not think the dogs had any health issues.

However, under cross-examination, he admitted that many dogs had not received veterinary treatment and that the air quality in their living space was poor.

LaPointe did not testify on his own behalf but submitted a written statement insisting he had provided adequate food, water, and veterinary care. The Board, however, found no documentary evidence to support these claims.

Final ruling

The Board ultimately ruled that AWS was justified in removing the animals, citing evidence of distress, lack of proper care, and LaPointe’s repeated failure to comply with directives.

“I was persuaded by the testimony of the Respondent’s witnesses --- Inspector Haaima and Dr’s. Goldie and Dam --- the photographic and video evidence presented showed that the Appellant had not complied with the required actions stipulated in the two Orders issued. This non-compliance resulted in poor living conditions for the Dogs causing distress and required their removal to alleviate their distress,” wrote Board member Mark Sraga, in the decision.

“The Animals were in distress at the time of the inspection on November 26, 2024, and it was necessary to remove them,” the ruling concluded.

Sadly, this was not the first time dogs had been removed from the LaPointe residence. On April 28, 2023, 22 dogs were removed from LaPointe’s home by the AWS, based on his failure to comply with an order to ensure the dogs had adequate food and a sufficient supply for the future, clean drinking water, and a sanitary, hazard-free environment. At that time, the Board found that the compliance order given did not follow proper procedure per the Animal Welfare Services Act and was therefore invalid, and the Board ordered the return of 22 dogs and five puppies born post-removal to LaPointe.