Tuesday, March 12, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.
Although the Performing Animal Welfare Society filed a lawsuit only last week against Bobby Berosini, the group already has won nearly $50,000 from the controversial orangutan trainer.
The funds are to compensate PAWS for attorney fees and other costs it expended defending itself in a defamation lawsuit Berosini had filed against it and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
PETA is expecting a similar award of attorney fees -- although about five times that amount -- from District Judge Nancy Becker in the next few days.
The question is whether Berosini, one-time star of the Stardust hotel-casino's "Lido de Paris" show, can pay.
A hearing was set for today to explore his assets, and allegations are expected to be made that he has been hiding his wealth.
Berosini had contended that videotapes surreptitiously shot of him whipping his performing orangutans before a performance had violated his privacy rights.
Copies of the videotape had been distributed by PETA and PAWS and made their way to national news programs.
Berosini won $3.1 million from a District Court jury but the Nevada Supreme Court tossed out that judgment, making Berosini the loser and liable for the costs of defending the "unreasonable" claims.
Becker declared last week that 70 percent of the allegations Berosini made against PAWS were unreasonable, making the performer responsible for 70 percent of the $60,000 in attorneys fees -- $42,000.
Becker earlier had awarded PAWS more than $6,500, bringing the total judgment to more than $48,500.
PETA was not part of the latest court order over the 1989 videotaping that went to trial in 1992 in District Judge Myron Leavitt's courtroom.
In her order, Becker differentiated PAWS' role from that of PETA's by noting that video experts determined that the tape released by PETA had been enhanced while the PAWS video had not.
But it is expected that she will award PETA 60 percent of its reported $400,000 costs at the trial.
Becker agreed with the Supreme Court that the comments made by PAWS director Pat Derby and others were "evaluative opinions that are protected against claims of defamation and libel."
The judge added that it was a PETA member, not a PAWS member, who videotaped the whipping of the orangutans by a stick-wielding Berosini in a private backstage area.
In ruling last summer that the video didn't violate Berosini's privacy rights, the high court stated that PETA and PAWS had "merely shown to the world how Berosini treated his animals."
"There was insufficient evidence to tie PAWS to any of the invasion of privacy (claims)," Becker agreed in her ruling filed Friday.
archive
