Results
Displaying 901 - 910 of 941
Title |
Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argentina - Cruelty - Ley 14346, 1954 | LEY DJA: S-0410 | This law seeks to protect animals against mIstreatment and cruel acts. Mistreatment are cruel acts and considered criminal offenses, which can be punished from 15 days to 1 year in prison. Article 2 of this law establishes the acts considered mistreatment, which includes not feeding domestic and captive animals with food in enough quantity and quality. Also included are the acts of forcing animals to work excessive hours without providing adequate rest according to the weather and stimulating them with drugs without pursuing therapeutic purposes, among others. Article 3 defines acts that are considered cruel. These acts include practicing vivisection for purposes that are not scientifically demonstrable, or in places or by people who are not authorized to operate on animals without anesthesia and without the title of doctor or veterinarian, except in cases of emergency. In addition, cruelty includes: mutilating any part of the body of an animal unless the action has purposes of improvement; marking of the respective animal species unless performed for reasons of mercy; performing public or private acts of animal fights, bullfights and parodies where animals are killed, injured or harassed; and other listed acts. | Statute | ||
| Archer v. State | 309 So. 3d 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020) | 2020 WL 7409970 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2020) | Defendant Tim Archer pleaded no contest to felony animal cruelty in Florida. Archer's dog Ponce apparently made a mess in Archer's house and, when Archer "disciplined" Ponce, the dog bit him, leading to Archer violently beating and stabbing the dog to death. Public outcry over mild punishment in the state for heinous acts of animal abuse led to "Ponce's Law," which enhanced penalties (although it did not retroactively apply to Archer). As a condition of Archer's plea agreement, both parties stipulated to a restriction on future ownership of animals as part of Archer's probation. On appeal here, Archer argues that the trial court erred in imposing these special conditions of probation. With regard to special condition 34 and 35, which prohibits him from owning any animal for the duration of his life and prohibits him from residing with anyone who owns a pet, Archer seeks clarification whether this prohibits him from residing with his ex-wife and children who own two cats, respectively. The court found that condition 35 would only be in effect for his three-year probationary term. Additionally, the court found condition 34 that imposes a lifetime ban on ownership exceeded the trial court's jurisdiction regardless of the open-ended language of Ponce's law. The animal restriction is not "a license to exceed the general rule that prohibits a court from imposing a probationary term beyond the statutorily permissible term, which in this case is five years." The case was remanded to the trial court to modify the conditions of probation to be coextensive with the probationary term. | Case | |
| AR - Initiatives - Proposed Initiated Act 1 (cruelty) | 2002 Proposed Initiative Act 1 | This ballot proposal sought to amend Arkansas' Animal Cruelty Act by making the knowing torture, mutilation, maiming, burning, poisoning, malicious killing, starving, or disfiguring of a non-exempted animal a crime known as "Aggravated Animal Cruelty." This offense would then become a Class D felony subject to enumerated penalties, including psychological counseling and forfeiture of the animal in question. This measure failed at the polls with 38% voting Yes and 62% voting No. | Statute | ||
| AR - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty/Animal Fighting Laws | A.C.A. § 5-62-101 - 127; 5-14-122 | AR ST § 5-62-101 -127; 5-14-122 | This section contains the Arkansas anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. A person commits a misdemeanor if he or she knowingly abandons any animal subjects any animal to cruel mistreatment, fails to supply an animal in his or her custody with a sufficient quantity of wholesome food and water fails to provide an animal in his or her custody with adequate shelter, kills or injures any animal belonging to another without legal privilege or consent of the owner, or carries an animal in or upon any motorized vehicle or boat in a cruel or inhumane manner. Aggravated cruelty to a cat, dog, or horse is a Class D felony if the offense involves the torture. | Statute | |
| ANOTHER WEAPON FOR COMBATING FAMILY VIOLENCE: PREVENTION OF ANIMAL ABUSE | Charlotte A. Lacroix | 4 Animal L. 1 (1998) | In this article, the author postulates that there is more than a mere coincidence between various forms of family violence. Furthermore, that acts of cruelty towards family pets are a form of family violence that has been largely unrecognized by the legal community. Admitting that much research still needs to be done to establish that there is a link between abuse towards people and abuse towards animals, the author invites the reader to consider this multi-victim approach to family violence and offers the strengthening of animal cruelty laws as a solution to this grave societal problem. | Article | |
| Animal welfare protection laws in the world | Sabine Brels | This is a index of laws around the world relating to animal welfare. | Article | ||
| Animal Welfare Protection at European level | Sabine Brels | This is an index of the European Union's Animal Welfare laws. | Article | ||
| ANIMAL WELFARE LAW IN CANADA AND EUROPE | 6 Animal L. 23 (2000) | The idea that animals are entities that deserve protection, irrespective of their utility to man, is firmly grounded in the Enlightenment. The principle that a creature's need for considerate treatment did not depend on the possession of a soul or the ability to reason, but on the capacity to feel pain was formulated and debated at that time. The debate continues today-Canada is in the midst of examining its own ethical, philosophical and legal beliefs about animal welfare and cruelty. This article examines the current state of animal welfare and cruelty laws and recent attempts through federal legislation to modernize the animal welfare provisions of the Canadian Criminal Code. Comparisons are drawn with European animal welfare and cruelty laws, which tend to be more concerned with an animal's welfare than Canadian laws, which tend to be more concerned with the economic interests of humans. | Article | ||
| ANIMAL VIOLENCE COURT: A THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE-BASED PROBLEM-SOLVING COURT FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF ANIMAL CRUELTY CASES INVOLVING JUVENILE OFFENDERS AND ANIMAL HOARDERS | Debra L. Muller-Harris | 17 Animal L. 273 (2011) |
Cases involving cruelty to animals are currently handled by the traditional criminal courts. These courts, however, are not effective at punishing animal abusers or protecting animal victims. Although all states have laws criminalizing various forms of animal cruelty, the reality is that most cruelty cases are not prosecuted; even when cruelty cases are successfully prosecuted, punishments are weak. This Comment proposes the creation of an Animal Violence Court, using juvenile animal abusers and adult hoarders as ideal candidates for a pilot animal cruelty justice system. The Animal Violence Court will provide for the ongoing safety and care of animal victims, will work to rehabilitate offenders, and will require long-term monitoring of offenders by the court. Modeled after similar problemsolving courts, the Animal Violence Court will improve upon the current criminal justice system, rehabilitate offenders, and protect innocent animals, sending a clear message that animal abuse will not be tolerated. |
Article | |
| Animal Protection Law - Mexico City | Ley de Protección Animal de Ciudad de México | This law seeks to protect animals, ensure their welfare, and provide attention, good treatment, maintenance, lodging, natural development, and health. Furthermore, it seeks to avoid mistreatment, cruelty, suffering, bestiality, and deformation of their physical characteristics, as well as to ensure animal health, public health, and the five freedoms of the animal. This law has had several reforms. Under this law, the Ministry of the Environment, through the Animal Care Agency, together with the Ministry of Education, coordinate the development of education, protection, care, and dignified treatment programs. At the same time, The Animal Care Agency, among other tasks, manages the veterinary hospital in the city. The sanctions imposed under Chapter X of this law, range from admonitions, and monetary fines, to arrest of up to 36 hours in the case of repeat offenders. This law stipulates the standards and regulations for the functioning of the Animal Surveillance Brigade, which is responsible for preventing animal cruelty, responding to reports of animal cruelty, and providing care to animals in need. | Statute |