Results

Displaying 111 - 120 of 6637
Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type
CA - Permits - CHAPTER 3. MISCELLANEOUS. Permits for Restricted Species 14 CA ADC s 671.1 - 671.6 14 CCR § 671.1 - 671.6 Permits are required for possession of restricted species, but the department does not issue permits for exotics pets. Administrative
ID - Veterinary - CHAPTER 21. VETERINARIANS. I.C. § 54-2101 - 2121 ID ST § 54-2101 - 2121 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
US - Eagle - Endangered and Threatened Species; Bald Eagle Reclassification; Final Rule Federal Register: July 12, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 133) RIN 1018-AC48

The Fish and Wildlife Service reclassifies under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) from endangered to threatened in the lower 48 States. The bald eagle remains classified as threatened in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Washington where it is currently listed as threatened. The special rule for threatened bald eagles is revised to include all lower 48 States. This action will not alter those conservation measures already in force to protect the species and its habitats. The bald eagle also occurs in Alaska and Canada, where it is not at risk and is not protected under the Act. Bald eagles of Mexico are not listed at this time due to a recently enacted moratorium on listing additional taxa as threatened or endangered.

Administrative
In re Kulka's Estate 18 P.2d 1036 (1933) 142 Or. 104

This action relates to a court order in an estate case.  The decedent left a legacy in the form of some timber reserves to the Human Society of Portland Oregon "to be used solely for the benefit of animals."  The executor refused to pay the legacy.  This is an appeal from a circuit court decision directing and authorizing Andrew Hansen, executor of the estate of Otto Kulka, deceased, to pay the petitioner a legacy from proceeds in the executor's hands.  The court affirmed the payment of the legacy.

Case
People v. Beam 244 Mich.App. 103 (2000) 244 Mich.App. 103 (2000)

Defendant was charged with owning a dog, trained or used for fighting, that caused the death of a person and  filed a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that M.C.L. § 750.49(10); MSA 28.244(10) was unconstitutionally vague.  The court granted defendant's motion, finding the terms "without provocation" and "owner" to be vague, and dismissed the case. The prosecutor appealed, and the Court of Appeals held that statute was not unconstitutionally vague. Reversed.

Case
NY - Horse Racing - Section 4043.2. Restricted use of drugs, medication and other substances 9 NY ADC 4043.2 9 NYCRR 4043.2 This regulation states which drugs and medications are permitted to be used in racehorses in New York, and how and when they may be administered. Administrative
MI - Ferrets - Chapter 287. Ferrets M. C. L. A. 287.891 - 901 MI ST 287.891 - 901 This chapter concerns ownership of ferrets in Michigan. A person shall not own or harbor a ferret over 12 weeks of age unless the ferret has a current vaccination against rabies with an approved rabies vaccine. A person may engage in hobby breeding of ferrets provided all requirements are met under Section 287.893. A person shall not release a ferret into the wild or abandon a ferret. Statute
ME - Lost Property - Chapter 21. Lost Goods and Stray Beasts. 33 M. R. S. A. § 1051 - 1060 ME ST T. 33 § 1051 - 1060 This section comprises Maine's Lost Goods and Stray Beasts Act. Statute
US - Disability - Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101, 12102, 12132; 2 U.S.C.A. § 1311 Following are excerpted sections from the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 that relate to assistance animals. Also included is § 1311 of the Civil Rights Act that defines discriminatory practices and outlines the remedies for such violations. Statute
People v. Romano 908 N.Y.S.2d 520 (N.Y.Sup.App.Term,2010) 2010 WL 3339158 (N.Y.Sup.App.Term)

Defendant appealed a conviction of animal cruelty under Agriculture and Markets Law § 353 for failing to groom the dog for a prolonged period of time and failing to seek medical care for it. Defendant argued that the term “unjustifiably injures” in the statute was unconstitutionally vague, but the Court held the term was not because a person could readily comprehend that he or she must refrain from causing unjustifiable injury to a domestic pet by failing to groom it for several months and seeking medical care when clear, objective signs are present that the animal needs such care.

Case

Pages