Relatives of Ramon Najera alleged the city failed to act on known threats. A judge dismissed the claims as unfounded.
SAN ANTONIO — A lawsuit filed against the City of San Antonio by loved ones of an elderly man who was viciously mauled to death by aggressive dogs in 2023 was tossed by a federal judge, who said complaints that the city violated their constitutional rights had no legal basis.
Ramon Najera Jr. and his wife, Juanita, were arriving to visit relatives at a west-side home on Feb. 24, 2023, when multiple dogs broke free from a neighbor’s dog and attacked them. Ramon Najera, 81, was killed, while Juanita had to be treated for severe injuries.
San Antonio fire officials at the time said crews responding to the scene observed Ramon Najera “being dragged by a dog (and) completely bloody before they got off the fire truck.”
Two dogs involved in the deadly mauling were eventually put down. Animal Control Services said at the time they had been involved in prior incidents where they bit others in the neighborhood.
Their owners, Christian Moreno and Abeline Schnieder, were criminally tried and sentenced to 18 and 15 years in prison, respectively, out of a maximum 20. They also both were issued $5,000 fines and forbidden from owning dogs in the future.
At around the same time, Juanita and other relatives of Ramon sued the city and its lead attorney, Andy Segovia, accusing them of violating their Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process “by knowingly releasing dangerous animals that had already posed a severe threat to public safety.” The lawsuit called out what it said was the city’s “failure to act upon known threats,” and sought damages to help the family cope with medical expenses and mental anguish.
On Tuesday, however, U.S. District Court Judge Orlando L. Garcia granted the city’s motion to dismiss. Citing previous dog attack cases, Garcia found that the Najeras and their legal team didn’t “plausibly” allege their rights had been violated and that they didn’t name a “proper defendant against which their claims for constitutional violations may be asserted.”
Garcia also said the amendment’s equal protection clause was moot in this case because the Najeras didn’t make allegations of socioeconomic or race-based discrimination.
“They do not allege that the city treated them differently than similarly situated individuals, nor do they allege that the decedent was tragically killed because of any protected characteristics or as a result of being personally denied equal treatment,” the judge wrote.
“This suit arose from tragic circumstances,” the city said in a statement. “However, the court has recognized that the city was not the cause of the event. The responsible individuals have been tried and convicted.”
The Najeras also filed a lawsuit against Moreno and Schnieder, but records indicate that was disposed months before their sentencing in September 2024.