Results

Displaying 1 - 10 of 6637

Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type

Institute of Marine Mammal Studies v. National Marine Fisheries Service 23 F. Supp. 3d 705 (S.D. Miss. 2014), appeal dismissed (Feb. 27, 2015) 2014 WL 2154348 The Institute of Marine Mammal Studies (IMMS) brought action against the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and others, alleging that NMFS regulations did not properly implement the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), and that the NMFS was improperly administering placement list for rehabilitated sea lions that could not be reintroduced into the wild. Parties cross-moved for summary judgment. After considering the parties' arguments, the administrative record, and the relevant law, the District Court found that the IMMS lacked standing to bring its claim that NMFS regulations did not properly implement the Marine Mammal Protect Act ("MMPA"). Further, the Court found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction of IMMS' claims that the NMFS was improperly administering a placement list for non-releasable sea lions. However, the Court found it may review the claims concerning the permit allowing IMMS to "take" sea lions. The Court found that a term included in IMMS' permit improperly delegated federal authority to third parties. The permit was therefore remanded to the agency for reconsideration. Each summary judgment motion was granted in part and denied in part. Case

VT - Hunting - § 4502 Uniform point system; revocation of license. 10 V.S.A. § 4502 VT ST T. 10 § 4502 Vermont has a point system for hunting licenses similar to that used for driver's licenses. Certain enumerated violations, including taking bear or deer with dogs, earn points which can result in the suspension or revocation of a hunting license (see (2)(N)). A game warden may shoot a dog who is pursuing a deer or moose close enough to endanger its life, or a fine may be issued. Statute

Switzerland - Cruelty - Swiss Animal Protection Ordinance

Swiss Animal Protection Ordinance 1981

Regulations on Animal Welfare based on the Swiss Federal Act on Animal Protection. This piece of legislation is comprehensive, including laws on animal husbandry, animal research, companion animals, breeding, transport and slaughter.

Statute

OH - Wooster - Breed - 505.14 Dangerous and vicious animals.

WOOSTER, OH., CODIFIED ORDINANCES § 505.14 (2000)

In Wooster, Ohio, no person may possess, harbor or keep a vicious animal, which includes any Pit Bull dog. A violation is a misdemeanor of the first degree. The dog or other vicious animal may be removed from the City or be humanely destroyed.

Local Ordinance

Adams v. Vance

187 U.S. App. D.C. 41; 570 F.2d 950 (1977)

An American Eskimo group had hunted bowhead whales as a form of subsistence for generations and gained an exemption from the commission to hunt the potentially endangered species. An injunction was initially granted, but the Court of Appeals vacated the injunction because the interests of the United States would likely have been compromised by requiring the filing of the objection and such an objection would have interfered with the goal of furthering international regulation and protection in whaling matters.

Case

Derecho Animal Volume 11 Núm 3

Tabla de contenidos

Editorial

Presentación del volumen 11/3 (2020)

Marita Giménez-Candela

7 - 9

PDF

10 - 12

PDF (English)

Policy

VA - Restaurants, animals - 2 VAC 5-585-3310. Prohibiting animals. 2 VA ADC 5-585-3310 2 VAC 5-585-3310 This Virginia regulation states that dogs may be allowed in outdoor dining areas if: (1) the outdoor dining area is not enclosed with floor-to-ceiling walls; (2) there is a separate entrance; (3) there is a sign at the main entrance stating that dogs are allowed in the outdoor dining area that is easily observable by the public; (3) food and water provided to dogs is served using equipment not used for human food service or is put in single-use receptacles; (4) dogs are not allowed to sit on chairs, benches, seats, or tables; (5) dogs are kept on a leash or within a pet carrier and under the control of adults at all times; (6) the establishment provides a means for picking up dog messes; and (7) there is a sign outlining some of these requirements observable to the public. Administrative

TN - Ordinances - § 5-1-120. Dogs and cats; licenses, shelters and other animal control facilities T. C. A. § 5-1-120 TN ST § 5-1-120 This Tennessee statute outlines the broad police power counties have with respect to dog and cats. It provides that counties, by resolution of their respective legislative bodies, may license and regulate dogs and cats, establish and operate shelters and other animal control facilities, and regulate, capture, impound and dispose of stray dogs, stray cats and other stray animals. Statute

Journal of Animal and Natural Resource Law Vol. 8

Published by the students of Michigan State University College of Law

Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law Vol. VIII (2012)

The table of contents is provided below.

Policy

Southall v. Gabel

277 N.E.2d 230 (Ohio App. 1971)

28 Ohio App.2d 295 (1971)

This case resulted from the alleged negligent transport of a horse that resulted in a drastic change in the horse's temperament (to a "killer horse"), which ultimately led to its destruction by its owner. Before trial, defendant demurred to plaintiff's petition on the ground that the action was barred under R.C. s 2305.11, the act being 'malpractice' and therefore required to be brought within one year after the termination of treatment. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court's decision overruling the demurrer to plaintiff's petition was correct, 'the petitioner is based on negligence for the transporting rather than malpractice.' Further, the Court held that until the Supreme Court speaks, veterinarians are not included in the definition of malpractice (reversed and remanded - See , 293 N.E.2d 891 (Ohio, Mun.,1972).