Results

Displaying 11 - 20 of 6637
Title Citation Alternate Citation Summary Type
UT - Agriculture - Ch. 4 Eggs U.C.A. 1953 §§ 4-4-101 - 108. UT ST §§ 4-4-101 - 108 This chapter of Utah law concerns the production and sale of eggs in the state. It establishes the standards for egg grading and what forms of rot and deformities render eggs illegal to sell in the state. It also mandates that egg producers in the state maintain records for examination by the department of health and human services in order to track the spread of foodborne illnesses. Statute
DE - Property - § 3050F. Dogs deemed personal property; theft; penalty 16 Del.C. § 3050F DE ST TI 16 § 3050F Dogs are considered personal property in Delaware. Statute
Tilson v. Russo 30 A.D.3d 856 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept., 2006), 2006 WL 1703632 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.), 818 N.Y.S.2d 311

In this New York case, plaintiff, an experienced recreational horse rider, was bitten by a horse she intended to use to practice her techniques at defendant's stable. The rider then  brought a negligence action against owners of horse that bit her on the shoulder. In affirming the lower court's granting of summary judgment, the appellate court found that rider's injury occurred in the context of her participation in the recreational sporting activity of horseback riding, for purposes of primary assumption of the risk principles. She was aware of the inherent risks in sporting events involving horses, had an appreciation of the nature of the risks, and voluntarily assumed those risks.

Case
US - Divorce/Custody - Uniform Marriage & Divorce Act. Section 307. Part III Dissolution. Section 307 Disposition of Property. ULA Marr & Divorce s 307 Uniform act created to address division of marital property upon divorce in equitable distribution jurisdiction. Two alternatives are given, directing equitable apportionment in one and division in just proportions in the other. Statute
Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 420 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2005) 2005 WL 2001100 (9th Cir.), 60 ERC 2025, 35 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,172, 05 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7480, 2005 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,216

 

Several public interest groups brought actions challenging Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) decision to transfer Clean Water Act (CWA) pollution permitting program for Arizona to that State.  Under federal law, a state may take over the Clean Water Act pollution permitting program in its state from the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if it applies to do so and meets the applicable standards.  When deciding whether to transfer permitting authority, the Fish and Wildlife Service issued, and the EPA relied on, a Biological Opinion premised on the proposition that the EPA lacked the authority to take into account the impact of that decision on endangered species and their habitat.  The plaintiffs in this case challenge the EPA's transfer decision, particularly its reliance on the Biological Opinion's proposition regarding the EPA's limited authority.  The court held that the EPA did have the authority to consider jeopardy to listed species in making the transfer decision, and erred in determining otherwise. For that reason among others, the EPA's decision was arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, the court granted the petition and remanded to the EPA.

Case
IN - Animal Sacrifice - RAJASTHAN ANIMALS AND BIRDS SACRIFICES (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1975 Act No. 21 of 1975 The law, specific to the North Indian state of Rajasthan, prohibits the sacrifice of animals and birds in temples or places of public religious worship. No person shall sacrifice an animal or birds or officiate at such a sacrifice—doing so is a criminal offence and violators may be imprisoned or fined. The Executive Magistrate may issue a prohibitory order if they receive information from a police officer that an animal sacrifice is going to be made Statute
CA - Abandonment - § 597f. Failure to care for animals; duty of peace or humane officers; West's Ann. Cal. Penal Code § 597f (repealed) CA PENAL § 597f (Repealed in 2022). Every owner of any animal, who permits the animal to be without proper care and attention, shall, on conviction, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. It shall be the duty of any peace officer, officer of the humane society, or officer of a pound or animal regulation department of a public agency, to take possession of the animal so abandoned or neglected and care for the animal until it is redeemed by the owner. Every sick, disabled, infirm, or crippled animal, except a dog or cat, may, if after due search no owner can be found therefor, be killed by the officer. all injured cats and dogs found without their owners in a public place directly to a veterinarian known by the officer or agency to be a veterinarian that ordinarily treats dogs and cats for a determination of whether the animal shall be immediately and humanely destroyed or shall be hospitalized under proper care and given emergency treatment. Statute
People v. Cumper 83 Mich. App. 490 (Mich. 1978)

Defendants were convicted of being spectators at a fight or baiting between dogs and appealed, charging that the "spectator" portion of the statute was impermissibly vague and unconstitutionally overbroad. The court found that the statute was constitutional because it punished attendance as a spectator at an event legitimately prohibited by law and defendants had fair notice of the conduct proscribed. The defendants also claimed that there was insufficient evidence however, the court found ample evidence upon which the jury rendered their decision.

Case
Canada - New Brunswick Statutes. Sheep Protection Act R.S.N.B. 1973, c. S-7, s. 1 - 6 This set of New Brunswick laws comprises the Sheep Protection Act. Under the Act, where a sheep is killed or injured by a dog, the owner of the sheep may, within forty-eight hours, notify the Minister. The Minister then appoints an investigator who reports his or her findings back to the Minister. The Minister may then recover the expenses of the investigation from the owner of the dog, and may order the destruction of the dog. Statute
IN RE: JAMES W. HICKEY, D/B/A S&S FARMS, AND S.S. FARMS, INC. 47 Agric. Dec. 840 (1988) 1988 WL 243389 (U.S.D.A.) Licensed dealer found guilty of numerous violations of Act involving care and housing of dogs and cats, failure to allow inspection of records, and failure to keep and maintain adequate records as to acquisition and disposition of animals, is properly penalized with 25-year suspension of license, civil penalty of $40,000, and cease and desist order. Case

Pages