To the editor:

The Webster County Attorney’s Office respects and appreciates the efforts of the Fort Dodge Messenger in their coverage of our local court system. However, it is necessary to respond to the article on the animal neglect case of David Collan published in your April 23rd, 2025, edition.

Las fall, our office, in conjunction with local law enforcement and animal control, successfully removed 29 dogs from Mr. Collan that had been neglected. A judgment of more than $20,000 was also entered. Most of these dogs have now recovered and have been placed with responsible owners.

In addition, the state filed one aggravated misdemeanor count of animal neglect causing serious injury or death for the one dog who could not be saved. Mr. Collan recently pled guilty as charged to that offense.

The article contained factual inaccuracies and was very disparaging to Judge Joseph Tofilon. The article led the reader to believe Judge Tofilon had made several lenient rulings or omissions in his sentencing order. It was also insinuated that Judge Tofilon had specifically overruled a prohibition in the civil case that Mr. Collan could not have any animals in his possession.

Judge Tofilon followed a carefully crafted agreement of the parties. The civil order did not prohibit Mr. Collan from owning any dogs, it only prevented him from getting the 29 dogs returned to him. As a condition of pretrial release, he was prohibited from possessing animals. As a result of violating that order, Mr. Collan spent approximately two weeks in jail. This jail time was considered in the recommendation of probation with no additional jail time.

In thai criminal case, any control of Mr. Collan’s future action could only come from terms of probation at sentencing. Veterinary care and breeding restrictions were not requested by the state as they are already covered by existing law. Based on his behavior and comments, it was apparent that Mr. Collan was likely to have dogs in his possession regardless of court order. It was in the best interest of these animals that the state be allowed access to them to ensure their safety. The alternative was the possibility Mr. Collan would hide them to prevent prosecution and their health go unmonitored.

The comments that Judge Tofilon overruled an order prohibiting Mr. Collan from owning animals or did not address concerns about future care of the dogs are factually inaccurate.

Darren Driscoll

Webster County Attorney