Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrews v. City of West Branch Iowa | 454 F.3d 914 (8th Cir., 2006) |
Appellants filed a suit against defendant, City of West Branch, Iowa and former police chief Dan Knight, seeking damages and relief under Section 1983. The dog was killed by Knight in the owners' fenced backyard in view of one of the plaintiffs. The district court's grant of summary judgment for the officer was reversed and the case was remanded for a jury trial. |
Case | ||
| Andrus v. Allard | 444 U.S. 51 (1979) |
The Court holds that the narrow exception in the BGEPA for "possession and transportation" of pre-existing eagles and eagle artifacts does not extend to sale of the those lawfully obtained artifacts. The legislative history and plain language of the statute is clear on Congress' intent to prohibit any commerce in eagles. This prohibition on commerce in eagle artifacts does not constitute an unconstitutional taking because the ability to sell the property is but one strand in the owner's bundle of property rights. The denial of one property right does not automatically equate a taking. For further discussion on the prohibition in commerce of pre-existing eagle artifacts, see Detailed Discussion of Eagle Act. |
Case | ||
| Andrus v. L.A.D. | 875 So.2d 124 (La.App. 5 Cir., 2004) | 2004 WL 1171150 (La.App. 5 Cir.,) |
Patron sued dog owner for damages after an alleged attack. The Court of Appeals, in reversing a finding for the patron, held that the patron did not establish that the dog posed an unreasonable risk of harm, which precluded a strict liability finding, and, that patron did not prove that the dog owner was negligent. Reversed. |
Case | |
| Animal & Natural Resource Law Review Volume XIX |
Published by the students of Michigan State University College of LawAnimal & Natural Resource Law ReviewVol. |
Policy | |||
| Animal & Natural Resource Law Review Volume XVI |
Published by the students of Michigan State University College of LawAnimal & Natural Resource Law ReviewVol. |
Policy | |||
| Animal & Natural Resource Law Review Volume XVII |
Published by the students of Michigan State University College of LawAnimal & Natural Resource Law ReviewVol. |
Policy | |||
| Animal & Natural Resource Law Review Volume XVIII |
Published by the students of Michigan State University College of LawAnimal & Natural Resource Law ReviewVol. |
Policy | |||
| ANIMAL CONSORTIUM | David S. Favre and Thomas Dickinson | 84 Tenn. L. Rev. 893 (2017) | This article will show that sufficient relational interest can exist between a human and companion animal and that this interest is widely accepted in our culture; therefore, financial recovery for the disruption of this relationship is a fair burden to place upon actors in today's world. This proposal does not seek to give any legal rights to companion animals; instead, this is a proposal to allow the law to acknowledge the depth and reality of the bond between humans and animals that exists in millions of families across the country. First, this article sets out the existing categories of damage for recovery when a defendant's tortious actions result in the death of a companion animal. Integral to this discussion is the reality that companion animals are considered property. Courts most often are unwilling to extend financial recovery to include the emotional loss of the owner of an animal. Second, this article will examine the history of the concept of consortium to show how the legal system has come to accept that the compensable harm is not limited to economic consequences, nor is it limited to husband and wife relationships. Third, this article will present information to support the position that companion animals are emotionally and psychologically important to the human members of many families. Fourth, this article will show that animals have already jumped out of the property box in a number of fact patterns, and therefore, it is appropriate to raise their status in this context as well. Fifth, this article will consider the application of the concept of animal consortium in detail as an extension of the common law cause of action. Finally, acknowledging some of the difficulties that courts may have in implementing this proposal, a legislative draft is proposed to accomplish the recovery sought by this article. | Article | |
| ANIMAL CRUELTY AND VIOLENCE AGAINST HUMANS: MAKING THE CONNECTION | Randall Lockwood | 5 Animal L. 81 (1999) | The idea that there is a connection between the way individuals treat animals and human beings has a long history in Western popular culture, but a shorter history as the subject of scientific research. Recently, a growing body of evidence has confirmed an association between repeated, intentional abuse of animals and a variety of violent antisocial behaviors including child abuse, domestic violence, and violent criminal activities. The public made this connection before most law-enforcement or mental health officials. Public sentiment for tougher and better-enforced animal cruelty laws is strong, and there has been a dramatic response to recent high-profile animal abuse cases. Sensitivity to the importance of animal abuse as both an indicator of exposure to violence in the home and a predictor of increased risk for future acts of violence against people, promises to be an important tool to prevent many forms of societal violence. | Article | |
| Animal Cruelty Laws in Arkansas in the Wake of Act 33 (S.B. 77): An Overview of the New State Animal Cruelty Legislation and Its | Karen L. Koch | 2009 Ark. L. Notes 123 |
This article provides an overview of the new state legislation, presents a cross-section of city animal cruelty ordinance language and penalties available in one easily accessible place, and identifies some questions about the effects the new state legislation may have on city animal cruelty ordinances. |
Article |