Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OK - Hunting - § 5-212. Obstruction of shooting, hunting, fishing and trapping prohibited--Landowner's rights--Penalties--Exempt | 29 Okl. St. Ann. § 5-212 | OK ST T. 29 § 5-212 | This law reflects Oklahoma's hunter harassment provision. Under the law, a person may not willfully obstruct or impede the participation of any individual in the lawful activity of shooting, hunting, fishing or trapping in this state. Violation is a misdemeanor with a fine of $100 to $500. A person convicted under this section is also liable to the person affected for all costs and damages resulting from the interference. | Statute |
| State v. Roche | State v. Roche. 37 Mo App 480 (1889) |
The defendants were convicted and sentenced upon an information under section 1609, Revised Statutes of 1879, charging them with unlawfully, wilfully and cruelly overdriving a horse, and thereupon prosecute this appeal. The court held that the evidence that a horse was overdriven does not warrant a conviction under Revised Statutes, 1879, section 1609, in the absence of proof, that the overdriving was wilful and not accidental. Thus, the court reversed the lower court. |
Case | |
| Citizens for Alternatives to Animal Labs, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of State University of New York | 92 NY2d 357 (NY, 1998) |
Citizens wanted access to University records dealing with biomedical research using cats and dogs. These records were created, as required by federal Law, but access to the records was requested under state law. According to the New York Freedom of Information Act (FOIL), documents held by an “agency” should be disclosed. The lower Appellate Division held that s ince the University did not fall under the definition of “agency" under New York Public Officers Law, it was not required to turn over such documents. The New York Court of Appeals, however, found that the Appellate Division's rationale for denying FOIL disclosure was inconsistent with precedent, and that the legislative goal behind FOIL of was liberal disclosure, limited only by narrowly circumscribed specific statutory exemptions. Thus, in reversing the Appellate Division's decision, the Court of Appeals held that the records were subject to disclosure. |
Case | |
| Argentina - Trade, wildlife - Ley 22.344, 1980 | LEY Nº 22.344 | This is the law by which Argentina approves and adopts the "Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora" (CITES), signed in the city of Washington on March 3, 1973, with its Appendices and Amendments. The purpose of CITES is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. | Statute | |
| TN - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Statutes | T. C. A. § 39-14-201 to 219; T. C. A. § 40-39-101 - 104 | TN ST § 39-14-201 to 219; TN ST § 40-39-101 - 104 | These Tennessee anti-cruelty provisions define "animal" as a domesticated living creature or a wild creature previously captured. A person commits the offense of cruelty to animals (a Class A misdemeanor) if he or she intentionally or knowingly tortures, maims or grossly overworks an animal; fails unreasonably to provide necessary food, water, care or shelter for an animal in the person's custody; abandons unreasonably an animal in the person's custody; transports or confines an animal in a cruel manner; or inflicts burns, cuts, lacerations, or other injuries or pain. Animal fighting is also prohibited under this section, with dog fighting incurring a felony penalty and cockfighting resulting in a misdemeanor in most cases. A person commits aggravated cruelty (a Class E felony) to animals when, with aggravated cruelty and with no justifiable purpose, he or she intentionally kills or intentionally causes serious physical injury to a companion animal. Exclusions include animal farming, research, veterinary practices, hunting, trapping, "dispatching" rabid animals or wild animals on one's property, among other things. | Statute |
| NH - Kennel - CHAPTER 466. DOGS AND CATS. | N.H. Rev. Stat. § 466:6 | NH ST § 466:6 | This New Hampshire statute outlines the provisions of dog group licenses (i.e., kennel licenses). | Statute |
| Medlen v. Strickland | 353 S.W.3d 576 (2011,Tex.App.-Fort Worth) | 2011 WL 5247375 |
[Reversed by Texas Supreme Court: 397 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. 2013)]. The Medlens sued Strickland for Avery's “sentimental or intrinsic value” because the dog had little or no market value and was irreplaceable. The trial court found that Texas law barred such damages, and dismissed the suit with prejudice. On appeal, the court stated that several opinions have supported damages based on sentimental or intrinsic value for personal property where the property has little or no market value. Because dogs are personal property that hold a special value to their owners, the court found that it was consistent to extend sentimental damages for the loss of a pet. The action was remanded for further proceedings. |
Case |
| McDougall v. Lamm (unpublished) | Not Reported in 2010 WL 5018258 (2010) |
Plaintiff witnessed her dog be killed by Defendant's dog. The court held that Plaintiff’s damages were limited to her dog's “intrinsic” monetary value or its replacement cost. Plaintiff was not entitled to compensation for the emotional distress she experienced in witnessing the attack. |
Case | |
| NY - Equine Activity - Article18-B. Safety in Agricultural Tourism | McKinney's General Obligations Law § 18-301 - 303 | NY GEN OBLIG § 18-301 - 303 | This 2017 New York set of laws is known as the “safety in agricultural tourism act." The activities defined as agricultural tourism are broad, and include equine therapy, u-pick Christmas trees, touring farms, and hunting on farms. The act requires that operators of agricultural tourism areas post at every point of sale or distribution of tickets a conspicuous “Warning to Visitors” relative to the inherent risks of participating in activities on working farms and to provide written information based on requirements from the commissioner of agriculture. Owners and operators of agricultural tourism areas shall not be liable for an injury to or death of a visitor if the provisions of this subdivision are complied with | Statute |