United States

Displaying 3941 - 3950 of 4785
Titlesort ascending Summary
Connecticut General Statutes: Chapter 333: Sections 6402-6405 Sections 6402-6405 of Chapter 333 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers offences against humanity and morality. Specifically, the statutes cover following topics: animal cruelty, transportation of animals, and docking of horses.
Connecticut General Statutes: Chapter 331: Section 6367 Section 6367 of Chapter 329 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers the transportation of wild animals.  Specifically, the statute establishes the duty of care that must be given to the public when transporting a wild animal.
Connecticut General Statutes 1918: Chapter 96: Sections 1879-1886 Sections 1879-1886 of Chapter 96 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers in general the Humane Society for Connecticut. Specifically, the sections cover the following topics: the powers of an agent from the society, the definition of an animal, and funding of the society.
Connecticut General Statutes 1918: Chapter 337: Section 6546 Section 6546 of Chapter 337 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers jurisdiction and powers of courts. Specifically, the statute states the power of the court to issue search warrants for animal cruelty.
Connecticut General Statutes 1918: Chapter 329: Section 6268 Section 6268 of Chapter 329 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers the unlawful injury to certain property of another.  Specifically, the statute states the punishment for hurting, maiming, poisoning anther's cattle, ox, horse, and mule.
Connecticut General Statutes 1902: Sections 2807-2816 The 1902 General Statutes of Connecticut sections 2807-2816 cover the following topics: definition of an animal, powers of an agent from humane society, and funding of the humane society.
Concerned Dog Owners of California v. City of Los Angeles


Dog owners mounted a constitutional challenge to a Los Angeles municipal ordinance that required all dogs and cats within the city to be sterilized. The Court of Appeal held that the ordinance did not violate the owners’ freedom of association rights, free speech rights. or equal protection rights. The court held that it was not unconstitutionally vague, was not outside of the city's police powers, did not vest unfettered discretion in city officials, did not constitute an unconstitutional prior restraint or an unconstitutional taking. Finally, the law did not violate individual liberties under the California Constitution.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations Topic Area
COMPANION ANIMAL
Community Cats: Changing the Legal Paradigm for the Management of So-Called “Pests” Recognizing that the science, policy, and law involving the different animal “pests” are unique, the approach to changing the traditional paradigm is largely the same. Although the debate continues surrounding free-roaming cats, the approach of cat advocates to turn the tide away from deeply entrenched lethal methods of animal control provides an interesting and useful case study on how to alter the political, scientific, and legal paradigm in favor of respecting animal life for all animals deemed “pests.”

Pages