Results
Displaying 1661 - 1670 of 6844
Title |
Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DE - Skunks and Raccoons - § 795. Prohibition of sale or transportation of live skunks or raccoons | 7 Del.C. § 795 | DE ST TI 7 § 795 | Without a permit from the state of Delaware, it is illegal to possess or sell a live skunk or raccoon. | Statute |
| DE - Spay, Neuter and Feral Cat - Subchapter II. Animal Population Control Program and Spay/Neuter Fund | 16 Del.C. § 3010F - 3021F | DE ST TI 16 § 3010F - 3021F | This chapter represents Delaware's Animal Population Control Program. The section beings with findings from a 2002 study of how many dogs and cats were reclaimed, adopted out, or euthanized. It also has a definitional section that includes a definition for "feral cat." The chapter also describes its funding base and what parties are qualified to receive assistance under the Spay/Neuter Fund. Effective on June 29, 2006, it became mandatory for all cats and/or dogs of reproductive age to be spayed or neutered and inoculated for rabies prior to adoption from any private animal rescue groups and animal shelters. | Statute |
| DE - Tether, dog - Chapter 9. Dogs. | 16 Del.C. § 3044F | DE ST TI 16 § 3044F | This Delaware statute addresses the requirements for indoor and outdoor facilities housing dogs. It includes storage, drainage, waste disposal, ventilation, lighting, shelter, height, and surface requirements. Food, water, and use of tethers are also addressed. The tether shall be of a type commonly used for the size dog involved, made of material not normally susceptible to being severed by the dog through chewing or otherwise, and shall be attached to the dog by means of a well-fitted collar that will not cause trauma or injury to the dog. The tether shall be a minimum of 10 feet in length and allow the dog convenient access to the dog house and to food and water containers. | Statute |
| DE - Trust for care of an animal - Chapter 35. Trusts | 12 Del.C. § 3555 | DE ST TI 12 § 3555 | Delaware enacted its pet trust law in 2006. A trust for the care of one or more specific animals living at the settlor's death is valid. The trust terminates upon the death of all animals living at the settlor's death and covered by the terms of the trust. | Statute |
| DE - Veterinary - Chapter 33. Veterinarians. | 24 Del.C. § 3300 - 3323 | DE ST TI 24 § 3300 - 3323 | These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners. | Statute |
| DE - Wildlife - Chapter 1. Protected Wildlife | 7 Del.C. § 101 - 204 | DE ST TI 7 § 101 - § 204 | These statutes comprise Delaware's protected wildlife provisions. The section outlines the powers and duties of the Department of Fish and Wildlife as well as how funds derived from fishing and hunting licenses may be used. The code also explains the procedure private parties may take when protected wildlife injures crops. | Statute |
| DE - Woodchuck - § 797. Woodchuck or groundhog not protected wildlife | 7 Del.C. § 797 | DE ST TI 7 § 797 | This Delaware statute declares that the woodchuck or groundhog will not be considered protected wildlife. | Statute |
| De Lanoy v. Taylor | 452 P.3d 1036 (Or.App., 2019) | 300 Or. App. 517 (2019) | This Oregon case involves a dispute over who now owns a female whippet dog named "Isis." Isis was adopted from the local humane society and lived with the plaintiff and his family until 2014. In the summer of 2014, plaintiff asked his friend Rich to keep Isis while plaintiff moved to Florida. Both plaintiff and Rich understood that Rich was just caring for Isis and that plaintiff remained Isis' owner. Defendant is Rich's ex-girlfriend had a different understanding; that plaintiff had abandoned Isis and, as such, Isis became defendant's property. In 2016, plaintiff filed an action for replevin against defendant, seeking immediate return of Isis. Defendant countered with a counterclaim for a declaratory judgment that the dog was gifted to Rich - who subsequently abandoned the dog - and so defendant became the rightful owner. A bench trial ruled in favor of plaintiff, finding insufficient evidence to establish that plaintiff had gifted the dog or that Rich had abandoned the dog. On appeal, defendant raises a single procedural error, that the court erred by granting plaintiff replevin the procedures in ORCP 83 A were not followed. Notably, the court found that there was no ruling against defendant with regard to noncompliance of a court rule. More importantly, there was no challenge to the court's disposition of the declaratory judgement counterclaim. Thus, defendant presented no error in the disposition of her counterclaim. Accordingly, because the trial court declared plaintiff to be the lawful owner of Isis, and no one has challenged that declaration, the court did not reach defendant's arguments about the proper procedure for a replevin claim. | Case |
| De Leon v. Vornado Montehiedra Acquisition L.P. | 166 F. Supp. 3d 171 (D.P.R. 2016) | 2016 WL 814825 (D.P.R. 2016) | The defendant in this case sought to dismiss plaintiff’s case, stating that the plaintiff claim did not have proper constitutional standing under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court denied defendant’s request and held that plaintiff did present sufficient evidence to establish standing under the ADA. In order to establish standing, the plaintiff needed to prove three elements: (1) actual or threatened injury, (2) causal connection between the injury and the challenged conduct, and (3) that a favorable court decision can redress the injury. The court determined that plaintiff did satisfy all three elements by showing that plaintiff’s disabled daughter was not allowed in defendant’s shopping mall with her service dog after the mall security guard was not properly informed of protocol regarding service dogs. Ultimately, the security guard mistakenly believed that the service dog needed documentation in order to enter the mall; however, the dog was properly identified as a certified service dog and should have been allowed into the mall. Defendant's motion to dismiss was denied. | Case |
| Dead baby night monkey lies in a tray meant for collecting feces from a cage | Slideshow Images |