United States
Displaying 1101 - 1110 of 4783
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| Detailed Discussion of North Dakota Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Great Ape law in North Dakota. Generally, in North Dakota, if a person obtains the correct license, he or she can keep an ape as a pet, an exhibitor, a zoo, or for any other non-prohibited purpose.The state board of animal health has categorized great apes as nontraditional livestock. In order to possess nontraditional livestock, including a great ape, a private owner must first obtain a license.Finally, great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. Great apes receive very limited protections under Montana’s endangered species law. |
| Detailed Discussion of Ohio Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Great Ape law in Ohio. The state of Ohio controls possession and ownership of great apes under a new dangerous wild animal law. This law applies primarily to private ownership. Like other states, Ohio does not define great apes as “endangered” under its own endangered species law. It does, however, cover them by reference to the federal endangered species list. Finally, great apes are covered under the state’s anti-cruelty law. Interestingly, the law’s exemptions only apply to companion animals rather than the general animal cruelty sections. |
| Detailed Discussion of Oklahoma Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Great Ape law in Oklahoma.Oklahoma does not have a law specifically addressing great apes; instead, it is unlawful for an individual to possess a great ape in the state of Oklahoma under the state’s endangered species law.Great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. Unlike many other states, the law does not exempt scientific research facilities from its provisions. |
| Detailed Discussion of Oregon Great Ape Laws | The following discussion begins with a general overview of the various Oregon state statutes and regulations affecting Great Apes. It then analyzes the applicability of those laws to the possession and use of apes for specific purposes, including their possession as pets, for scientific research, for commercial purposes, and in sanctuaries. |
| Detailed Discussion of Pennsylvania Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Great Ape law in Pennsylvania. While the state of Pennsylvania controls possession and importation of “exotic wildlife” by law, the definition of “exotic wildlife” is vague as to whether it includes great apes. Instead, Pennsylvania regulates the possession of great apes by administrative regulation and reference to the federal endangered species list. In addition, Pennsylvania’s administrative code addresses the commercial use of great apes in menageries with a USDA Class C Exhibitor permit.Like other states, Pennsylvania does not define great apes as “endangered” under its own endangered species law. It does, however, define endangered and threatened species to include federally listed endangered and threatened species under its accompanying regulation. Finally, great apes are covered under the state’s anti-cruelty law. |
| Detailed Discussion of Pet Trusts | This article explores the history of trusts created for the care and maintenance of companion animals under common law. It then examines the enactment of state pet trust laws, which now allow individuals to establish trusts to care for pets after their death. Finally, the paper discusses recent challenges in court to pet trusts for excessive amounts. |
| Detailed Discussion of Philosophy and Animals |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Polar Bears and the Laws Governing Them in the Five Arctic States |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Police Shooting Pets |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Police Shooting Pets Update | This paper will begin by outlining how legal claims for the wrongful shooting of dogs are brought in court under 42 U.S.C. §1983, which allows individuals to sue for deprivation of civil rights by those acting under color of law. Associated defenses of qualified and municipal immunity will also be discussed. The paper then examines briefly how state claims may factor into this type of litigation. The next section focuses on how litigation involving the shooting of pets has evolved in the past ten years. It then concludes with an examination of how states and police departments are attempting to reduce such incidents and what, if anything, legislatures are implementing to address legal claims. |