Results
Displaying 6151 - 6160 of 6637
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KS - Hunting - Unlawful Acts. 32-1014. Obstruction or impeding of lawful activities | K. S. A. 32-1014 | KS ST 32-1014 | This Kansas law reflects the state's hunter harassment provision. Under the law, no person shall willfully obstruct or impede the participation of any individual in the lawful activity of hunting, furharvesting or fishing. The law does not apply to law enforcement and does not limit the right of landowners or their tenants to limit trespass. | Statute |
| CT - Spay and Neuter - Chapter 436A. Animal Population Control | C. G. S. A. § 22-380a to 380m | CT ST §§ 22-380a to 380m | This set of Connecticut laws provides the state's dog and cat sterilization laws. Under the section, no pound is allowed to sell or give away any unspayed or unneutered dog or cat to any person unless such pound receives $45 from the person buying or adopting such dog or cat. These funds are paid quarterly by the municipality into the animal population control account established under section 22-380g. At the time of receipt of such payment, the pound shall provide a voucher, for the purpose of sterilization and vaccination benefits to the person buying or adopting such dog or cat. The chapter also provides the procedure for a veterinarian to participate in the program and the method by which he or she would be paid. Further, the law states that a town clerk may collect an additional $6 for each license issued pursuant to section 22-338 for an unspayed or unneutered dog. | Statute |
| Green v. Housing Authority of Clackamas County | 994 F.Supp. 1253 (D. Oregon, 1998) | Plaintiffs were tenants of a county housing authority and alleged that the housing authority violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, by failing to reasonably accommodate their request for a waiver of a "no pets" policy to allow for a hearing assistance animal in the rental unit to reasonably accommodate a hearing disability. The housing authority argued that the dog was not a reasonable accommodation for the tenant's specific disability because the dog was not certified as a hearing assistance animal. The court granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, holding that the housing authority violated the federal statutes when it required proof from the tenants that the dog had received hearing assistance training. | Case | |
| Crawford v. Van Buren County, Ark. | 678 F.3d 666 (C.A.8 (Ark.)) | 2012 WL 1813423 (C.A.8 (Ark.)) |
In this § 1983 action, defendant kennel operator alleged taking of private property without just compensation, unreasonable search and seizure, and due process violations in relation to seizure of dogs, and that the local humane society conspired with government entities. On appeal of summary judgment for the defendants, the court found her claims against the county were barred, and that she failed to first exhaust her administrative remedies. The animal control officer was acting pursuant to a valid search warrant when she entered the property to seize the dogs, and, under an animal cruelty plea agreement, had authority to inspect Crawford's premises. With regard to the Humane Society defendants, the court found summary judgment proper because there was no evidence amounting to a civil conspiracy to seize the dogs for personal gain. |
Case |
| WA - Eggs - Chapter 96.25. Washington Wholesome Eggs and Egg Products Act | West's RCWA 69.25.010 - 930 | Wash. Rev. Code Ann. §§ 69.25.010 - 930 | This collection of Washington laws prohibits the confinement of egg-laying hens in battery cages and mandates the use of cage-free housing. The laws also ban the sale of eggs in Washington from producers that house egg-laying hens in battery cages. These laws apply to egg producers in the state of Washington and out of state producers. | Statute |
| WY - Ecoterrorism - § 6-3-414. Trespassing to Unlawfully Collect Resource Data | W. S. 1977 § 6-3-414 | WY ST § 6-3-414 | This statute prohibits trespassing to unlawfully collect resource data. Collecting resource data is done by entering onto open land without an ownership interest or permission to collect information or photograph resource data (including animal species). Violation of this law is punishable by imprisonment of not more than one year and/or a $1,000 fine for the first offense, and imprisonment from ten days to a year and/or a $5,000 fine for subsequent offenses. | Statute |
| Carpenter v. State | 18 N.E.3d 998 (Ind. 2014) | --- N.E.3d ----2014 WL 5339365 (Ind. Oct. 21, 2014) | After being convicted by a Superior Court bench trial and having the Superior Court’s judgment affirmed by the Court of Appeals, defendant appealed the admission of evidence recovered from his home after officers entered it without a warrant in pursuit of an aggressive and bloody dog. The Supreme Court of Indiana found that the entry was unreasonable under the Indiana Constitution and that the evidence obtained pursuant to a subsequent search warrant was inadmissible. The Superior Court's judgment was therefore reversed. | Case |
| GA - Horses - Chapter 13. Humane Care for Equines. | Ga. Code Ann., § 4-13-1 to 10 | GA ST § 4-13-1 to 4-13-10 | This section comprises Georgia's Humane Care for Equines Act. The act states that it is unlawful for the owner of any equine to fail to provide adequate food and water to such equine; to fail to provide humane care for such equine; or to unnecessarily overload, overdrive, torment, or beat any equine or to cause the death of any equine in a cruel or inhumane manner. The Act also outlines procedures for the care impounded of equines as well as disposal procedures, which includes auction and euthanasia, when the owner cannot be found or refuses to enter into a consent order. Violation of this chapter results a misdemeanor. | Statute |
| CA - Hunting - Chapter 5. Management of Deer | West's Ann. Cal. Fish & G. Code § 450 - 460 | CA FISH & G § 450 - 460 | In an effort to to encourage the conservation, restoration, maintenance, and utilization of California's wild deer populations, these sections mandate the creation of plans for deer herd management units. Such units may encompass a single deer herd or a group of deer herds having similar management and habitat requirements and characteristics. The objectives of such management plans are the restoration and maintenance of healthy deer herds in the wild state and to provide for high quality and diversified use of deer in California. | Statute |
| IN RE: JEROME A. JOHNSON AND LAURA JOHNSON | 51 Agric. Dec. 209 (1992) | 1992 WL 130452 (U.S.D.A.) | Ability to pay civil penalty is not to be considered in determining penalty under Animal Welfare Act. | Case |