Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rossi v. Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Soc. | Slip Copy, 2009 WL 960204 (N.D.N.Y.) |
Petitioner-Debtor challenged the Bankruptcy Court’s denial of Petitioner’s application for a Temporary Restraining Order and for a stay pending appeal after the Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society seized 23 cats from Petitioner’s prior home for failure to provide proper sustenance/cruelty to animals and subsequently obtained a bond against Petitioner for the cost of providing animal care. The United States District Court, N.D. New York denied Petitioner’s motion for leave to appeal requesting relief identical to that which was denied by the Bankruptcy Court, finding that the exhibits submitted show that Petitioner was currently charged with four misdemeanors, and that the commencement of the criminal charges against Petitioner and the posting of security pending the disposition of such criminal charges fall within the exception to the automatic stay under federal law. |
Case | |
| United States v. Robinson | Slip Copy, 2017 WL 806655 (D. Neb. Mar. 1, 2017) |
In this case, defendants were charged with conspiracy to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to launder money after the defendant’s vehicle was searched by law enforcement during a traffic stop. During the stop, the police officer used a service dog while searching the vehicle. The defendants argued that any evidence gained by the police officer be suppressed on the grounds that the search of the vehicle was not constitutional. Specifically, the defendants argued that the police officer did not have reasonable suspicion to use the service dog while searching the vehicle. Ultimately, the court found that the search by the police officer and his service dog did not violate the defendant’s constitutional rights because the police officer had reasonable suspicion to search the vehicle. The court focused on the fact that the officer had legally stopped the vehicle and while talking to the driver and passengers he had established a reasonable suspicion that the defendants were transporting drugs. Once the police officer had a reasonable suspicion that the vehicle was transporting drugs, the police officer was legally allowed to use the service dog to search the vehicle. As a result, the court held that none of the evidence found during the search should be suppressed for violating the defendant’s constitutional rights. |
Case | |
| Bell v. State | 761 S.W.2d 847 (Tex. App. 1988) |
Defendant convicted of cruelty to animals by knowingly and intentionally torturing a puppy by amputating its ears without anesthetic or antibiotics. Defense that "veterinarians charge too much" was ineffective. |
Case | |
| CA - Hunting, Internet - § 3003. Internet hunting and associated activities. | Cal. Fish & Game Code §3003 | Cal. Fish & Game Code Ann. § 3003 (West) | This statute prohibits Internet hunting in the State of California. Under the law, it is unlawful to own or operate a shooting range or site for the purpose of online shooting or spearing of an animal. It is also unlawful to create, maintain, or utilize an Internet Web site, or other service or business in this state, for the purpose of online shooting or spearing of a bird or mammal. | Statute |
| LA - Ordinances - CHAPTER 18. ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE. | LA R.S. 3:2731 | This Louisiana statute provides that the governing bodies of all parishes and municipalities may impose license taxes on all dogs, enact ordinances for the regulation of dogs running at large, and maintain pounds for the impounding of dogs. | Statute | |
| City of Boston v. Erickson | 877 N.E.2d 542 (Mass.2007) | 450 Mass. 1010 (2007) |
This very short case concerns the disposition of defendant Heidi Erickson's six animals (four living and two dead) that were seized in connection with an animal cruelty case against her. After Erickson was convicted, the city withdrew its challenge to the return of the living animals and proceeded only as to the deceased ones. A single justice denied the city's petition for relief, on the condition that Erickson demonstrate “that she has made arrangements for [t]he prompt and proper disposal [of the deceased animals], which disposal also is in compliance with health codes.” Erickson challenged this order, arguing that it interfered with her property rights by requiring her to discard or destroy the deceased animals. However, this court found no abuse of discretion, where it interpreted the justice's order to mean that she must comply with all applicable health codes rather than forfeit her deceased animals. |
Case |
| DE - Dangerous - Delaware Dangerous Dog Laws | 16 Del.C. §§ 3071F to 3081F | §§ 920 to 928. Redesignated as 16 Del.C. §§ 3071F to 3081F by 80 Laws 2016, ch. 248, § 6, eff. May 25, 2016 | These Delaware statutes comprise the state's dangerous dog laws. Among the provisions includes the mandatory seizure of dogs who have chased or pursued persons on bicycles twice in a twelve-month period or those that have killed or inflicted serious injury on people or other domestic animals. However, no dog shall be considered dangerous or potentially dangerous if a person was, at the time the injury was sustained, committing criminal trespass or other tort upon premises occupied by the owner of the dog, or was teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog, or was committing or attempting to commit a crime. An owner who violates the provisions regarding ownership of dangerous dogs faces graduated fines based on the conduct at issue. | Statute |
| Norma Oficial Mexicana Nom 051-Zoo-1995 | Nom 051-Zoo-1995 | This law lays out the general criteria for animal transportation and handling, with additional provisions based on the species. Its objective is to define the framework for animal transportation, aiming to reduce suffering throughout the entire transport process. | Statute | |
| Rickrode v. Wistinghausen | 340 N.W.2d 83 (Mich.App.,1983) | 128 Mich.App. 240 (Mich.App.,1983) |
In this Michigan case, a mother sued as next friend for injuries suffered by her daughter after the daughter was attacked by defendant's domestic cat. The lower court directed a verdict in favor of the cat's owner and the mother then appealed. The Court of Appeals held that evidence warranted submission to the jury on questions of strict liability and negligence. If an owner has knowledge that her cat has bitten children before and that it was suffering from a disease that makes the cat extra sensitive, then a prima facie case has been made that the cat was dangerous, posing more than the normal risk of harm from cats. |
Case |
| IA - Ordinances - Chapter 351. Dogs and Other Animals. | I. C. A. § 351.41 | IA ST § 351.41 | This Iowa state provides that the chapter relating to state dogs running at large laws does not limit the power of any city or county to prohibit dogs and other animals from running at large, whether or not they have been vaccinated for rabies, and does not limit the power of any city or county to provide additional measures for the restriction of dogs and other animals for the control of rabies and for other purposes. | Statute |