Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Norwest v. Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital | 293 Or. 543 (Or. 1982) | 652 P.2d 318 (Or. 1982) |
This court found that there was no common law liability where a tortfeasor's conduct caused a child to lose parental support and care. The court declined to create a new common law cause of action for parental consortium, and suggested that it was up to the legislature to create such a cause of action. However, dicta in the case refers to an invasion of the animal/animal owner relationship as actionable misconduct. |
Case |
| Scared manually restrained night monkey laying on an unclean countertop | Slideshow Images | |||
| UT - Native American - § 64-13-40. Worship for native American inmates | U.C.A. 1953 § 64-13-40 | UT ST § 64-13-40 | This unique provision allows Native American inmates in Utah access to eagle parts and other traditional ceremonial objects for use in worship. The inmate has the burden of establishing his or her Native American ancestry. | Statute |
| NY - Hunting - Chapter 43-B. Of the Consolidated Laws | McKinney's E. C. L. § 11-1904 | McKinney's E. C. L. § 11-1904 | This New York statute provides that no person who owns, operates or manages a facility that harbors non-native big game mammals shall knowingly permit the taking on such premises by any person who pays a fee to take a live non-native big game mammal by any of the following means: the shooting or spearing of a non-native big game mammal that is tied or hobbled; the shooting or spearing of a non-native big game mammal that is staked or attached to any object; the shooting or spearing of a non-native big game mammal that is confined in a box, pen, cage or similar container of ten or less contiguous acres from which there is no means for such mammal to escape, among other things. | Statute |
| Grey v. Johansson | Slip Copy (unpublished decision), 2016 WL 1613804 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 22, 2016) | This suit was filed after Grey and Johansson entered into a disagreement about who was the rightful owner of Johansson’s late wife’s horse, Navy. Grey was Johansson’s lawyer and was left responsible for caring for and handling all sales regarding her horses after her death. Grey filed suit for fraud and defamation against Johansson after he publicly referred to Grey as a “horse stealer.” Ultimately, the court held that Grey did not produce enough to evidence to establish a case for either fraud or defamation against Johanasson. Although Johanasson did call Grey a “horse stealer,” the court found that this comment was protected by judicial privilege. | Case | |
| TX - Lien, veterinary - § 70.010. Liens for Veterinary Care Charges for Large Animals | V. T. C. A., Property Code § 70.010 | TX PROPERTY § 70.010 | This Texas law relates to veterinary liens for large animals, defined as livestock or a cow, horse, mule, ass, sheep, goat, llama, alpaca, farm elk, or hog. The term does not include a common household pet such as a cat or dog. A licensed veterinarian has a lien on a large animal and the proceeds from the disposition of the large animal to secure the cost of veterinary care the veterinarian provided to the large animal. The lien attaches on the 20th day after the veterinarian first provided care to the large animal and attaches regardless of whether the veterinarian retains possession of the animal. | Statute |
| Sherman v. Kissinger | 195 P.3d 539 (Wash.,2008) | 146 Wash.App. 855 (2008) |
A dog owner sued a veterinarian and a veterinary hospital after her dog died. The Court of Appeals held that the medical malpractice act did not apply to veterinarians, and thus, did not bar claims for breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, trespass to chattels, and breach of bailment contract; the three-part analysis in McCurdy controlled the measure of damages and the burden of proof for damages; genuine issues of material fact about the market value of the dog, whether it could be replaced, and whether owner was entitled to present evidence of the dog’s intrinsic value, precluded summary judgment limiting owner's damages; the trial court did not abuse its discretion in striking expert’s testimony about the loss of the human-animal bond because owner was not entitled to emotional distress damages; and defendants were not entitled to attorney fees under the small claims statute. |
Case |
| Stray from Heart, Inc. v. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene of City of New York | 20 N.Y.3d 946 (N.Y., 2012) | 2012 WL 6115617 (N.Y.,2012); 958 N.Y.S.2d 674 |
Petitioner, an animal rescue organization, filed suit seeking the enforcement of the Animal Shelters and Sterilization Act. The court held that the act does not provide for a private right of action for money damages. Instead, the legislative history reveals the law was designed to benefit the general public in New York City as well as stray cats and dogs. The court affirmed the lower court's decision with costs. |
Case |
| Ley de Protección y Bienestar Animal de Tlaxcala | Ley de Protección y Bienestar Animal de Tlaxcala | This law seeks to promote animal welfare by providing proper care, suitable living conditions, fostering their natural development, and maintaining their health. It also seeks to protect their natural behavior, guaranteeing public health. Article 3, IV defines animal as a “Multicellular living being with a developed nervous system, which feels and moves voluntarily or by instinct.” It includes various definitions, but it does not define animal cruelty. | Statute | |
| RI - Rodeo - Chapter 20. Rodeo Animals and Livestock | Gen. Laws, 1956, § 4-20-1 to 9 | RI ST § 4-20-1 to 9 | The purpose of this chapter is to establish guidelines and criteria for rodeo and rodeo related activities relative to humane treatment of rodeo animals and rodeo livestock in the state. | Statute |