United States
Title | Summary |
---|---|
Access Now, Inc. v. Town of Jasper, Tennessee |
Plaintiffs Access Now, Inc. and Pamela Kitchens, acting as parent and legal guardian on behalf of her minor daughter Tiffany brought this action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against defendant Town of Jasper, Tennessee under the ADA after the town denied her request to keep a keep miniature horse as service animal at her residence. The town's ordinance at issue provided that no person shall keep an enumerated animal within 1000 feet of any residence without a permit from the health officer. The Jasper Municipal Court held a hearing and determined that the keeping of the horse was in violation of the code and ordered it removed from the property. On appeal, this Court found that while the plaintiffs contended that the horse helped Tiffany in standing, walking, and maintaining her balance, Tiffany does not have a disability as defined by the ADA and does not have a genuine need to use the horse as a service animal. Further, the Court found that the horse was not a service animal within the meaning of 28 C.F.R. § 36.104 because the animal was not used in the capacity of a service animal and instead was a companion or pet to Tiffany. The plaintiffs' complaint was dismissed with prejudice. |
Abundant Animal Care, LLC v. Gray |
|
A SLAVE BY ANY OTHER NAME IS STILL A SLAVE: THE TILIKUM CASE AND APPLICATION OF THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT TO NONHUMAN ANIMALS | |
A SHORT HISTORY OF (MOSTLY) WESTERN ANIMAL LAW: PART II | |
A Public Policy Toward the Management of Feral Cats |
|
A HOUSE ON FIRE: LINKING THE BIOLOGICAL AND LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY CRISES | |
A Brief History of Animal Law, Part II (1985 – 2011) | |
A 'HARE' RAISING LAPSE IN MEAT INDUSTRY REGULATION: HOW REGULATORY REFORM WILL PULL THE MEAT RABBIT OUT FROM WELFARE NEGLECT | |
907 Whitehead Street, Inc. v. Secretary of U.S. Dept. of Agriculture |
|
32 Pit Bulldogs and Other Property v. County of Prentiss |
While a criminal trial regarding alleged dog-fighting was pending, the Circuit Court, Prentiss County, ordered the humane euthanization of 18 of 34 seized pit bulldogs. The alleged dog owner appealed. The Supreme Court held that allegations the dogs had been trained to fight, could not be rehabilitated as pets, and posed serious threat to other animals and people, related to the "physical condition" of the dogs, as statutory basis for humane euthanization. Affirmed. |