Results

Displaying 6571 - 6580 of 6649
Title Citation Alternate Citation Summary Type
In the Matter of the Application of Richard M. COPLAND, as an Executor of the estate of Lenore Lewis Abels, Deceased 988 N.Y.S.2d 458 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 24172 Co-executor of an estate petitioned the Westchester County Surrogate's Court for a decree in accordance with EPTL 7–8.1[d] reducing the amount of money to be transferred from the estate to the trustees of a testamentary pet trust established under the decedent's will. Since the decedent gave very specific instructions as to how she wanted her cats to be cared for and the petition was in opposition to the decedent’s wishes, the court denied the reduction. Case
Canada - Saskatchewan - The Animal Protection Act Chapter A-21.2 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 2018 This set of laws comprises the Saskatchewan Animal Protection Act, which was amended in 2018. Under the Act, no person responsible for an animal shall cause or permit the animal to be or to continue to be in distress. An animal can be in distress if it is deprived of sufficient food, water, shelter, or veterinary care/medical attention, or kept in unsafe or unsanitary conditions, among other things. The Act also outlines the powers of humane societies to rescue animals in distress and then sell, give away, or euthanize such animals if the owners cannot be located. A person who contravenes the Act is guilty of an offence with a fine of not more than $25,000, to imprisonment for not more than two years or to both for a first offence. Further, in addition to any other penalty imposed, if a person responsible for an animal is found guilty, the court may make an order prohibiting that person from owning or having custody or control of any animal for a period specified by the court. Part 3 (sections 28 to 31) of the Act outlines the provisions relating to damage or injury done by dogs and Part 4 (sections 32 to 34) deals with protections for service animals. Statute
OH - Parma - Breed - Pit Bull Ordinance PARMA, OH., CODE OF ORDINANCES § 618.09

In Parma, Ohio, it is prohibited to own, harbor, or keep a pit bull. Licensed pet shops, menageries, zoological gardens and circuses are exempt if the location conforms to the provisions of the City Zoning Code, all animals and animal quarters are kept in a clean and sanitary condition, animals are maintained in quarters so constructed as to prevent their escape, and no person resides within 50 feet of the quarters in which the animals are kept. However, pit bulls may not be brought into City limits.

Local Ordinance
Soldal v. County of Cook 506 US 56 (1992)

Fourth Amendment protections apply regardless of the specific reasons for why a seizure may have occurred.

Case
KY - Ferret - 150.355 Ferrets KRS § 150.355 KY ST § 150.355 This Kentucky law prohibits the use of ferrets in hunting. Additionally, the law states that no person shall keep a ferret which was born in the wild as a pet or for any purpose, unless he or she has procured a ferret permit from the commissioner. Statute
CA - Cruelty, unattended animal - § 43.100. Property damage or trespass to motor vehicle resulting from rescue of animal; West's Ann.Cal.Civ.Code § 43.100 CA CIVIL § 43.100 This California law effective January 1, 2017 states that there is no civil liability for property damage to a motor vehicle if the damage was caused by a person rescuing an animal under Section 597.7 of the Penal Code. Statute
Journal of Animal Law Table of Contents Volume 5

  Published by the students of Michigan State University College of Law

Journal of Animal Law Vol. V (2009)

The table of contents is provided below.

Policy
Kovar v. City of Cleveland 102 N.E.2d 472 (Ohio App. 1951) 60 Ohio Law Abs. 579 (1951)

This case involved a petition by LaVeda Kovar, et al against the City of Cleveland to obtain an order to restrain the City from disposing of dogs impounded by the City Dog Warden by giving or selling them to hospitals or laboratories for experimental and research purposes.  The Court of Appeals held that the City of Cleveland, both by its constitutional right of home rule and by powers conferred on municipal corporations by statute, had the police power right to provide that no dog should be permitted to run at large unless muzzled, and any dog found at large and unmuzzled would be impounded.  Further, by carrying out the mandate of the city ordinance by disposing of these impounded dogs was simply the performance of a ministerial or administrative duty properly delegated to Director of Public Safety.

Case
Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. ex rel. Beulah v. R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc. 2017 WL 7053738 (Not Reported in A.3d) (Conn. Super. Ct. Dec. 26, 2017) In this case the petitioner, Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc., sought a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of three elephants, Beulah, Minnie, and Karen, which are owned by the respondents, R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc. and William R. Commerford, as president of R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc. The issue was whether the court should grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus because the elephants are “persons” entitled to liberty and equality for the purposes of habeas corpus. The court denied the petition on the ground that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction (because the plaintiffs lacked standing) and the petition was wholly frivolous on its face in legal terms (elephants are not "persons" according to the court). The court he court dismissed the petition for writ of habeas, but pointed to the state's anti-cruelty laws "as a potential alternative method of ensuring the well-being of any animal." Case
WA - Veterinary - Chapter 18.92. Veterinary Medicine, Surgery, and Dentistry. West's RCWA 18.92.010 - 900 WA ST 18.92.010 - 900 These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners. Statute

Pages