|Title||Citation||Alternate Citation||Agency Citation||Summary||Type|
|Claddie Savage v. Prator||886 So.2d 523 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2004)||2004 WL 2240592 (La.App. 2 Cir.)||
A Parish Sheriff informed game clubs the parish ordinance against cockfighting would be enforced, despite the fact that cockfighting tournaments had been held at the game clubs since 1991. The game clubs filed for and received a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the parish ordinance. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court decision. Reversed by Savage v. Prator , 921 So.2d 51 (La., 2006).
|US - AWA - House Conference Report 1985 (AWA)||House Conference Report 99-447 (1985)||
The Senate amendment designates this title as the “Improved Standards for Laboratory Animals Act.”
|In re: JOHN D. DAVENPORT, d/b/a KING ROYAL CIRCUS.||57 Agric. Dec. 189 (U.S.D.A. May 18, 1998)||1998 WL 300096||Since 7 USCS § 2140 requires that exhibitors make their records identifying animals available for inspection at all reasonable times, it is not unreasonable to expect that records be with animals as they are transported||Case|
|European Union - Food Production - Regulations for Marketing Eggs||Official Journal L 2/1 , 05/01/2001||No 5/2001||This European Union regulation amends No 1907/90 of the marketing standards for eggs by making it compulsory to indicate the farming method on eggs.||Administrative|
|KY - Ecoterrorism - Chapter 437. Offenses Against Public Peace||KRS § 437.410 - 429||KY ST § 437.410 - 429||This chapter concerns the protection of animal enterprise facilities in Kentucky. Prohibited acts include exercising control over a facility or its property without consent of the owner, disruption or destruction of property of a facility, entering a facility with the intent to commit a prohibited act, and entering a facility with the intent to disrupt or damage the enterprise and then remaining on the grounds knowing that entry is forbidden. Any person who violates any provision of KRS 437.410 to 437.420 shall be subject to a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not less than 6 months but not more than 1 year, or both, for each violation.||Statute|
|DC - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Statutes||DC CODE § 22-1001 - 1015||DC ST § 22-1001 - 1015||This D.C. statutory section comprises the anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. Whoever knowingly overdrives, overloads, drives when overloaded, overworks, tortures, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance, cruelly chains, cruelly beats or mutilates, any animal, or knowingly causes such acts, or one who unnecessarily fails to provide proper food, drink, air, light, space, veterinary care, shelter, or protection from the weather, faces imprisonment up to180 days, or a fine of $250, or both. Actions that result in serious bodily injury or death to the animal result in felony prosecution with imprisonment not exceeding 5 years or a fine of $25,000, or both. "Animal" is defined by statute as all living and sentient creatures (human beings excepted). This section also prohibits animal fighting as either a felony (i.e., wagering or conducting the fight) or a misdemeanor (knowingly being present).||Statute|
|Bal Harbour Village v. Welsh||879 So.2d 1265 (Fl. 2004)||879 So.2d 1265 (Fl. 2004)||
Defendant owned four dogs prior to the enactment of an ordinance prohibiting municipality residents from owning more than two dogs in one household. The municipality brought suit against Defendant for failing to comply with the ordinance. The trial court denied the municipalities prayer for permanent injunctive relief, but the Court of Appeals overruled the decision holding the ordinance could constitutionally be enforced under the police power to abate nuisance.
|AR - Endangered Species - 002.00.1-05.27. Endangered Species Protected||AR ADC 002.00.1-05.27||Ark. Admin. Code 002.00.1-05.27||This Arkansas regulation states that it is illegal to import, transport, sell, purchase, take or possess any endangered species of wildlife or parts thereof except as provided.||Administrative|
|Lay v. Chamberlain||2000 WL 1819060 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2000) (Not Reported in N.E.2d)||2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 5783||Chamberlain owned a dog breeding kennel with over one hundred fifty dogs. An investigation was conducted when the Sheriff's Office received complaints about the condition of the animals. Observations indicated the kennel was hot, overcrowded, and poorly ventilated. The dogs had severely matted fur, were sick or injured, and lived in cages covered in feces. Dog food was moldy and water bowls were dirty. Many cages were stacked on top of other cages, allowing urine and feces to fall on the dogs below. A court order was granted to remove the dogs. The humane society, rescue groups, and numerous volunteers assisted by providing food, shelter, grooming and necessary veterinary care while Chamberlain's criminal trial was pending. Chamberlain was convicted of animal cruelty. The organizations and volunteers sued Chamberlain for compensation for the care provided to the animals. The trial court granted the award and the appellate court affirmed. Ohio code authorized appellees' standing to sue for the expenses necessary to prevent neglect to the animals. The evidence was sufficient to support an award for damages for the humane society, the rescue groups, and the individual volunteers that protected and provided for the well-being of the dogs during the months of the trial.||Case|
|IA - Endangered Species - WILDLIFE CHAPTER 481B. ENDANGERED PLANTS AND WILDLIFE||I. C. A. § 481B.1 - 10||IA ST § 481B.1 - 10||Iowa law sets out the definitions related to endangered species. It also provides a list of prohibited acts related to these species, including any taking, transporting, purchasing or selling of the species or their parts. An exception is listed for damage to property or human life, provided a permit is secured first.||Statute|