Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VA - Licenses - § 3.2-6528. Amount of license tax | Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6528 | VA ST § 3.2-6528 | This Virginia statute provides that the governing body of each county or city shall impose by ordinance a license tax on the ownership of dogs within its jurisdiction. With regard to cats, the governing body of any county, city or town which has adopted an ordinance requiring licensing of cats shall impose by ordinance a license tax on the ownership of cats within its jurisdiction. The tax amount may vary depending on whether the pet is male or female, and neutered or spayed. | Statute |
| OH - Trust - Chapter 5804. Creation, Validity, Modification and Termination of Trust | R.C. § 5804.08 | OH ST § 5804.08 | Ohio enacted its pet trust law in 2007. A trust may be created to provide for the care of an animal alive during the settlor's lifetime. The trust terminates upon the death of the animal or, if the trust was created to provide for the care of more than one animal alive during the settlor's lifetime, upon the death of the last surviving animal. | Statute |
| MO - Ferguson - Breed - Sec. 6-21. Regulation of pit bull dogs. | FERGUSON, MO., CODE OF ORDINANCES § 6-21 |
In Ferguson, Missouri, it is unlawful to keep, harbor, own, or possess any pit bull, with exceptions for dogs in the city on the effective date of the ordinance. Such dogs must be registered and properly confined, or else kept on a leash and a muzzle. Owners must post "Beware of Dog--Pit Bull" signs, keep liability insurance, and photographs for identification purposes. Violations may result in fines and imprisonment, as well as the seizure and impoundment of the dog. |
Local Ordinance | |
| PARKER v. MISE | 27 Ala. 480 (Ala., 1855) | 62 Am.Dec. 776 (Ala., 1855) |
In Parker v. Miser , 27 Ala. 480 (Ala. 1855), the court recognized that at common law, an action existed for the conversion or injury to property, and acknowledged dogs as property. The court went on to note that some amount of nominal damage existed for the wrongful killing of an animal, even in the absence of a precise amount. Where the killing of the animal was done in reckless disregard, a plaintiff could seek punitive damages. |
Case |
| MN - Restaurants - 157.175. Dogs; outdoor food and beverage service establishments | M. S. A. § 157.175 | MN ST § 157.175 | This Minnesota law allows a statutory or home rule charter city to adopt an ordinance permitting food and beverage service establishments to allow dogs to accompany persons patronizing designated outdoor areas. The law describes the permitting process that establishments must first undergo. At a minimum, the ordinance must include the following five requirements, which must be posted conspicuously on a sign at the premises: (1) employees must be prohibited from touching, petting, or otherwise handling dogs; (2) employees and patrons must not allow dogs to come into contact with serving dishes, utensils, tableware, linens, paper products, or any other items involved in food service operations; (3) patrons must keep their dogs on a leash at all times and must keep their dogs under reasonable control; (4) dogs must not be allowed on chairs, tables, or other furnishings; and (5) dog waste must be cleaned immediately and the area sanitized. | Statute |
| SD - Dogs - Consolidated Dog Laws | S D C L §9-29-12; S D C L § 40-1-41; S D C L § 40-34-1 - 16; S D C L 40-12-1 - 6; S D C L § 41-6-78; § 41-8-15; S D C L § 41-15-14; S D C L § 41-17-18.1 | These South Dakota statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, vicious dog laws, and rabies vaccination provisions. | Statute | |
| NH - Exotic Pets - Chapter 466-A. Wolf Hybrids | N.H. Rev. Stat. § 466-A:1 to 466-A:6 | NH ST § 466-A:1 to 466-A:6 | This section of laws comprises New Hampshire's wolf-dog hybrid act. Under the law, no person shall sell or resell, offer for sale or resale, or release or cause to be released a wolf hybrid in the state of New Hampshire. A person may temporarily import a wolf hybrid provided that he or she shows proof of spaying or neutering and has accurate vaccination records. Each wolf hybrid shall be under the physical control of the owner or confined in an enclosure or structure sufficient to prohibit escape. Any person in violation of this chapter or any rule adopted under this chapter shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. | Statute |
| Carl v. Resnick | 714 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. 1999) |
In this Illinois case, plaintiff Judy Carl was riding her horse on a trail in the Cook County Forest Preserve when the horse upon which defendant was riding pinned its ears back, turned its body toward plaintiff's horse, and kicked plaintiff and her horse. One hoof struck plaintiff's leg, causing her injury. In interpreting the state's Equine Act, the court observed that plaintiff's complaint against defendant was not barred by the Equine Act unless plaintiff's recreational riding of her own horse on a public trail was one of the limited activities sought to be encouraged by the Act. After determining that there was no conflict between the Illinois EALA and Animal Control Act, the court reversed the trial court's order denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and entered summary judgment for plaintiff on Count I as to liability under the Animal Control Act (510 ILCS 5/16 (West 1995)).
|
Case | |
| State v. Kingsbury | 29 S.W.3d 202 (Texas 2004) | 2004 WL 308153 (Texas) |
A cruelty to animals case. The State alleged that the appellees tortured four dogs by leaving them without food and water, resulting in their deaths. Examining section 42.09 of the Texas Penal Code, Cruelty to Animals, the Court found that “torture” did not include failure to provide necessary food, care, or shelter. The Court held that the criminal act of failing provide food, care and shelter does not constitute the felony offense of torture. |
Case |