Results

Displaying 51 - 60 of 369
Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type
ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE, COMPLAINT FOR VALERIE BUCHANAN, JANE GARRISON, AND NANCY MEGNA DECLARATORY This action concerns a lawsuit filed by the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), et al, over the lack of action by the federal agency, the Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to adopt a policy on what constitutes appropriate conditions for primates in federally licensed or registered facilities. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the failure of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United State Department of Agriculture to make a final decision concerning the defendants' proposed “Policy On Environment Enhancement For Nonhuman Primates.” See 64 Fed. Reg. 38,145 (July 15, 1999) (Policy). APHIS determined at least seven years ago that APHIS enforcement officials and the regulated community urgently need such a policy to insure that primates are housed in “physical environments adequate to promote the[ir] psychological well-being,” as required by the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). 7 U.S.C. § 2143. By failing to make a final decision on the proposed Policy, defendants are violating the Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2143, and are unreasonably delaying and/or unlawfully withholding agency action in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(1). Pleading
NC - Exotic Pets - .0212 Importation Requirements: WIild Animals 2 NC ADC 52B.0212 2 NCAC 52B.0212 This North Carolina regulation states that person must obtain a permit from the State Veterinarian before importing any of the following animals into this State: skunk; fox; raccoon; ringtail; bobcat (includes lynx and other North and South American felines as cougars, jaguars, etc.); coyote; marten; brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). Permits for the importation into this State of any of these animals shall be issued only if the animal(s) will be used in a research institute, or for exhibition by a USDA licensed exhibitor, or organized entertainment as in zoos or circuses. Any species or hybrid of a mammal not otherwise covered in the Administrative Code that is found to exist in the wild or naturally occurs in the wild must be accompanied by a valid certificate of veterinary inspection. Administrative
Nonhuman Rights Project on behalf of Tommy and Kiko v. 31 N.Y.3d 1054, 100 N.E.3d 846 (2018) 2018 WL 2107087 (Mem), 2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 03309 The petitioner, Nonhuman Rights Project brought this appeal on behalf of Tommy and Kiko, who are two captive chimpanzees. The chimpanzees had been confined by their owners in small cages within a warehouse and a cement storefront in a crowded residential area, respectively. Petitioner sought leave to appeal from an order of the Appellate Division, which affirmed two judgments of the Supreme Court declining to sign orders to show cause to grant the chimpanzees habeas relief. The lower courts based their denial of habeas corpus for the chimpanzees on the dictionary definition for "person." The term “person” tends to lean towards an entity that is recognized by law as having most of the rights and duties of a human. The Appellate Division also reasoned that chimpanzees are not considered people because they lack the capacity to bear legal duties or to be held legally accountable for their actions. As a counter, the Petitioner argued that the same can be said for human infants or comatose human adults, yet no one would say that it is improper to seek a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of one of them. The Appellate Division therefore based their denial on the fact that chimpanzees are not a member of the human species. In the instant action, Court of Appeals of New York denied the motion for leave to appeal. In the concurring opinion, Judge Fahey states that the better approach is not to ask whether a chimpanzee fits the definition of a person or whether it has the same rights and duties as a human being, but whether he or she has the right to liberty protected by habeas corpus. The concurring opinion also found that the Appellate Division erred by misreading the case it relied on and holding that a habeas corpus challenge cannot be used to seek transfer; a habeas corpus challenge can be used to seek a transfer to another facility. Although Judge Fahey recognizes that Chimpanzees share at least 96% of their DNA with humans and are autonomous, intelligent creatures, he concurred with the Appellate Division’s decision to deny leave to appeal. However, he ultimately questioned whether the Court was right to deny leave in the first instance. Case
NM - Endangered Species - Chapter 17. Game and Fish and Outdoor Recreation. N. M. S. A. 1978, § 17-2-37 to 17-2-46 NM ST § 17-2-37 to 17-2-46 These statutes comprise the New Mexico Wildlife Conservation Act. Included in the provisions are definitions related to the statute, legislative policies, and regulations for listing or delisting species. Violation of the Act constitutes a misdemeanor and can incur a penalty from $50 - 1,000 depending on the categorization of the species taken. Statute
FL - Importation - Chapter 5C-30. Enforcement and Penalties Rule 5C-30.001 - 004, F.A.C. Fla. Admin. Code r. 5C-30.001 - 004 This set of statutes establishes the procedures for the inspection and quarantine of imported animals and sets penalties for violations of the state's animal import laws. Administrative
TX - Endangered Species - Chapter 68. Endangered Species V. T. C. A., Parks & Wildlife Code § 68.001 - 021 TX PARKS & WILD § 68.001 - 021 Texas defines endangered species as those listed on the federal ESA List as well as those designated in the state. No person may capture, trap, take, or kill, or attempt to capture, trap, take, or kill, endangered fish or wildlife nor may he or she possess, sell, distribute, or offer or advertise for sale those species (unless allowed as described in the subchapter). Notably, this chapter excepts from its provisions coyotes, cougars, bobcats, prairie dogs, and red foxes (with no mention as to what occurs in the event they become endangered). Violation of the provisions results in a Class C Parks and Wildlife Code misdemeanor for the first offense, a Class B misdemeanor for the second offense, and a Class A misdemeanor for subsequent offenses. Statute
DE - Exotic Animals - Chapter 903. Exotic Animal Regulations 3 DE ADC 903-1.0 - 14 3 Del. Admin. Code 903-1.0 to 14 These regulations govern the permitting process, possession, sale, rehabilitation and exhibition of exotic animals, i.e., live wild mammals, hybrids of wild mammals, and live reptiles not native to or generally found in the State of Delaware. The State Veterinarian or her or his designee shall have the authority to administer these regulations and shall be solely responsible for making the determinations required herein. Administrative
OK - Importation - Subchapter 25. Wildlife Classified as Domesticated and Exempt OK ADC 800:25-25-1 - 3 OAC 800:25-25-1 - 3 The purpose of this Subchapter is to establish a list of wildlife that are to be considered domesticated and, therefore, exempt from licensing and permit requirements of the Department. Administrative
CA - Fish & Game - Chapter 6.5. Control of Illegally Taken Fish and Wildlife West's Ann. Cal. Fish & G. Code § 2580 - 2589 CA FISH & G § 2580 - 2589 This set of laws outlines various violations involving the possession and movement of illegally obtained animals and imposes liability for those activities. Statute
FL - Endangered - Endangered and Threatened Species Act West's F. S. A. § 379.2291 - 2311 FL ST § 379.2291 - 379.2311 (formerly FL ST § 372.072 - 074) These Florida statutes define endangered and threatened species and provide the State's intent to protect these species. Under statute, the intentional killing or wounding of a listed species incurs a third degree felony. Interestingly, the state has a reward program for the arrest and conviction of those who violate state endangered species laws. Statute

Pages