November 15, 2024 - The City’s Chief of Police had authority provide shelter to Williams’s dog, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 343.29, subd. 1 (2022). The City failed, however, to provide Williams timely notice, as required under Minn. Stat. § 343.235, subd. 3 (2022), and so the seizure and impoundment were not valid and substantially justified. Because the seizure and impoundment were not justified, the dog should have been returned the day Williams learned of its mistreatment and was able to return home. Because the seizure and impoundment were not substantially justified by law, and the dog should have been returned to Williams immediately upon his availability to take charge of the animal, the costs of the care and keeping of the dog following the day it was rescued from Williams’s porch are not Williams’s responsibility. One of the people who mistreated Williams’s dog now cohabitates with Williams and continues to provide care for his other animals. While the dog is physically fit, Williams cannot provide the care required by law for the animal. As a result, the Judge cannot authorize the return of the animal to Williams.