Results

Displaying 71 - 80 of 6638
Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type
Shively v. Dye Creek Cattle Co. 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 238 (Cal.App.3.Dist.) 29 Cal.App.4th 1620 (Cal.App.3.Dist.)

This California case concerned a personal injury action arising from a collision between the plaintiff's car and defendant's black Angus bull, which was lying on the highway at night. The trial court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. In reversing this decision, the Court of Appeal held that the open range law does not itself define the duty owners of cattle owe nor does it exempt them from the duty of ordinary care.

Case
Bolivia - Rights of nature - LEY Nº 300, 2012 LEY Nº 300, 2012 Ley 300 establishes the legal framework for the conservation of the environment, or "mother earth." This law recognizes the rights of mother earth and the legal status that are subjects of rights. Statute
TX - Licenses - § 826.032. Registration; Criminal Penalty V. T. C. A., Health & Safety Code § 826.032 TX HEALTH & S § 826.032 This Texas statute provides that a person commits an offense (Class C misdemeanor) if he or she fails to or refuses to register or present for registration a dog or cat owned by the person as required by state law or local ordinance. Statute
WI - Racing - Chapter 562. Regulation of Racing and on-Track Pari-Mutuel Wagering W. S. A. 562.001 - 13 WI ST 562.001 - 13 Wisconsin's department of administration is responsible for issuing licenses for occupations of participants in horse racing and dog racing. In order to own and operate a racetrack where pari-mutuel wagering is conducted a license must be obtained. Before a license is obtained, a public hearing must be held and the city in which the racetrack is to operate must adopt the resolution. The Department is required to appoint an administrator that has experience in gaming management and knowledge of animal racing and pari-mutuel wagering. Greyhounds are required to be registered with the National Greyhound Association of Abilene, Kansas in order to enter into a race. This statute also prohibits the use of live lure or bait in the training of race dogs. A dog may not be entered into a race if it was trained with live bait. Statute
Decision AHC4806-2017 Decision AHC4806-2017 (Original case in Spanish below; English translation attached as pdf). The Supreme Court of Justice rules in favor of the spectacled bear, ‘Chucho’, granting him the habeas corpus after the bear’s attorney challenged the lower court decision that denied it. Chucho is a 22 year old spectacled bear that was born and raised in semi-captivity. He lived for 18 years in a natural reserve in the city of Manizales with his sister. After his sister died, Chucho became depressed and started escaping. The environmental authorities thought that it would be in the best interest of the bear to relocate him, for which they decided to move him to a zoo in the northern of Colombia. Unfortunately, the living conditions of Chucho were diminished, as he went from living in semi-captivity to living into a smaller area. Attorney Luis Domingo Maldonado filed an habeas corpus in representation of the bear that was denied on first instance by the civil chamber of the Superior Tribunal of Manizales. Attorney Luis Domingo Maldonado argued that the current legal system did not have a specific proper mechanism that allowed the taking of immediate and urgent measures to protect the rights of animals as sentient beings to retire them for centers of captivity when they have spent their lives in natural reserves. He also used as examples the precedents from Brazil and Argentina where a chimpanzee and an orangutan were granted habeas corpus. Attorney Maldonado sought that the court order the immediate and permanent relocation of Chucho to the natural reserve ‘La Planada’, located in the Department of Narino. The Civil Chamber reversed the decision on first instance, and ordered the relocation of Chucho from the zoo in Barranquilla to a more appropriate location of semi-captivity conditions. In its reasoning, the magistrate judge stated that animals are entitled to rights as sentient beings, not as humans, and that the idea is to insert a morality of respect to counter a global ecological public order where the tendency of men is to destroy the habitat. After long considerations, the chamber stated that it is necessary to modify the concept of ‘subject of rights’ in relation with nature, understanding that who is subject of rights is not necessarily correlatively-bound to have duties. “The legal, ethical and political purpose is the unavoidable need to create a strong conscience to protect the vital environment for the survival of men, conservation of the environment and as a frontal fight against the irrationality in the man-nature relationship.” Case
PR - Ordinances - Municipal regulation of domestic animals PR ST T. 24 § 651 24 L.P.R.A. § 651

This Puerto Rico statute confers authority to the municipal councils of Puerto Rico to regulate by ordinance, the running at large of domestic animals, destruction and impounding of such animals, as well as the regulation of muzzling and licensing of dogs.  In addition, the councils are given authority to enact all needful ordinances to protect the public health as affected by the running at large of domestic animals.

Statute
CA - Crimes - § 597y. Violations; methods of killing; penalty West's Ann. Cal. Penal Code § 597y CA PENAL § 597y A violation of Section 597u [Animals; prohibited killing methods] or 597v [Newborn dog or cat; methods of killing] is a misdemeanor. Statute
US - Marine Mammals - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental 2001 WL 929542 (F.R.) FR Doc. 01-20647 (2001)

NMFS, upon application from the University of California San Diego, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Scripps), is issuing regulations to govern the unintentional take of a small number of marine mammals incidental to the continued operation of a low frequency (LF) sound source by Scripps.

Administrative
Conservation Force v. Salazar 715 F.Supp.2d 99 (D.D.C., 2010) 2010 WL 2244122 (D.D.C.)

Plaintiffs to this suit — organizations and individuals that support sustainable hunting of the Canadian Wood Bison — alleged that the Secretary of the Department of Interior violated several provisions of the ESA in his treatment of that species. Specifically, Plaintiffs contend that the Secretary failed to: (1) make a twelve-month finding as to the status of the Canadian Wood Bison upon petition and (2) process Plaintiffs’ applications to import bison hunting trophies. In granting the Defendant's motion to dismiss, the court found that Plaintiffs’ intent to sue letter did not specify to the Secretary that they intended to challenge his subsequent failure to issue a twelve-month finding. Since Plaintiffs gave the Secretary inadequate opportunity to review his actions and take corrective measures, the claim was dismissed. Plaintiffs — four individuals who each successfully hunted a Wood Bison in Canada — sought declaratory judgment against the Service under the ESA for failure to process their applications to import bison trophies. The court also held that the request for declaratory judgment was moot where Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that they ever intended to again apply for import permits.

Case
How to add a Statute

Once you log on, go to the upper gray bar and click on "Add Content."

From there, select "Statute."

ALL STATUTES MUST FIRST BE SAVED IN PLAIN TEXT FORMAT LIKE IN NOTEPAD. YOU WILL COPY AND PASTE FROM NOTEPAD. THIS MUST BE DONE TO REMOVE FORMATTING.

Basic page

Pages