Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. v. Zak | 486 F.Supp.2d 208 (D.Mass., 2007) | 2007 WL 1427442 (D.Mass.) |
Defendant pleaded guilty to three counts under the MBTA after agents determined that he killed 250 great blue herons; he then went to trial on the remaining counts under the MBTA and BGEPA related to his killing of a juvenile bald eagle on his commercial fish growing operation. On appeal, defendant contended that he cannot be found guilty under the MBTA unless the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew the bird he was shooting was protected and intentionally shot it with that knowledge (defendant stated that he shot a "big brown hawk'). The court disagreed, finding the overwhelming authority requires no such specific scienter on the part of the actor. With regard to defendant's contention that the government failed to prove the "knowingly" prong of the BGEPA, the court was equally unpersuaded. The evidence demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knowingly shot the eagle as it sat perched on the dead pine tree on the edge of his property, regardless of whether he knew the juvenile bird was an eagle or, as he said, “a big brown hawk.” |
Case |
| Switzerland - Cruelty - Swiss Federal Act on Animal Protection of March 9, 1978 | Swiss APA 1978 |
The following is one of two pieces of Swiss legislation concerning animal welfare. It is highly comprehensive and covers all aspects of animal welfare including but not limited to scientific research, farming, treatment of pets, national and international animal sales. This Act clearly states that no one shall unjustifiably expose animals to pain, suffering, physical injury or fear. |
Statute | |
| England - Greyhounds - The Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010 | 2010 No. 543 | These Regulations cover license requirements, including renewal, suspension and cancellation; and license conditions for the racing of greyhounds in England. Conditions include the attendance of a veterinary surgeon at every race, kennels at races, microchipping and race injury records. | Statute | |
| OH - Reynoldsburg - Breed - 505.35 Control and harboring of vicious or dangerous dogs and other vicious or dangerous animals. | REYNOLDSBURG, OH., CODE OF ORDINANCES §§ 505.01, 505.35 (1996) |
In Reynoldsburg, Ohio, no person shall own, keep, or harbor any vicious dog, which includes any pit bull dog. A violation is a misdemeanor of the second degree, and the vicious dog shall be seized, impounded, and humanely destroyed. |
Local Ordinance | |
| TN - State animal - § 4-1-337. Official state pet | T. C. A. § 4-1-337 | TN ST § 4-1-337 | In 2014, Tennessee enacted a law that makes dogs and cats adopted from Tennessee animal shelters and rescues the official state pet. | Statute |
| Austin v. Bundrick | 935 So.2d 836 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2006) | 41,064 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/30/06), 2006 WL 1791161 (La.App. 2 Cir.) |
This Louisiana case involves a suit against the owner of a cow (Bundrick) that wandered into the road where it was struck by plaintiff Austin's vehicle. Bundrick and his insurer, Colony Insurance Company, appealed the partial summary judgment finding Bundrick liable for the damages resulting from the accident. In reversing the lower court's order for partial summary judgment and remanding for a trial on the merits, the court noted that it is well settled that when an auto strikes a cow on one of the enumerated "stock law" highways, the burden of proof rests upon the owner of the animal to exculpate himself from even the slightest degree of negligence. |
Case |
| McDonald v. Ohio State Univ. Veterinary Hospital | 644 N.E.2d 750 (Ohio Ct.Cl., 1994) | 67 Ohio Misc.2d 40 (1994) |
After defendant filed a stipulation admitting liability for a botched surgery on defendant's show dog that ultimately led to euthanization, a trial was held as to the issue of damages. Evidence adduced at trial showed that "Nemo" had been trained by plaintiff as a Schutzhund or "sport dog" in Schutzhund schooling. The court noted that while dogs are considered personal property in Ohio and market value is the standard award for such personal property, market value in this case was merely a "guideline." In addition to the loss of the specially trained dog, the court also found significant the loss of stud fees for the dog and potential future gains in sustaining the trial court's award of $5,000 in damages. |
Case |
| Journal of Animal Law Table of Contents Volume 7 |
Published by the students of Michigan State University College of LawJournal of Animal Law Vol. VII (2011)The table of contents is provided below. |
Policy | ||
| News Archives (2018 and prior) |
News Archives (2018 and prior)
2018 |
Policy | ||
| VT - Lien - § 2075. Lien for keeping or pasturing animals | 9 V.S.A. § 2075 | VT ST T. 9 § 2075 | A person to whom charges are due for pasturing, boarding, or keeping domestic animals placed with the consent of the owner thereof in his or her care, if the charges become due while such animals remain in his or her possession, may retain the same until such charges are paid. After 30 days when the charges are due, he or she may sell the animals in the manner provided for the sale of property under a lien for repairs, if such charges remain unpaid. | Statute |