Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The History of Animal Law, Part I (1972-1987) | Joyce Tischler | Joyce Tischler, 1 Stan. J. Animal L. & Pol'y 1 (2008) | Animals have always been the subjects of litigation. Early legal literature is replete with cases that range from the conversion of a farmer’s cow to the debate about who owns wildlife, [1] from criminal prosecutions of humans for cruelty to animals [2] to criminal prosecutions of animals for crimes that they allegedly committed. [3] The purpose of this article is not simply to discuss the significance of individual cases involving animals, but rather to explore the roots of a large-scale, organized movement, which started in the early 1970s in the United States, spearheaded by attorneys and law students with the express purpose of filing lawsuits to protect animals and establishing the concept of their legal rights, regardless of the species of the animals or the ownership interest of humans. What we now call Animal Rights Law or Animal Law began when attorneys consciously considered animal-related legal issues from the perspective of the animal’s interests, when they began to view the animal as the de facto client, and where the goal was to challenge institutionalized forms of animal abuse and exploitation. Within the scope of a law review article, it is not practical to list all of the lawsuits filed from 1972 to 1987. [4] The goal of this article is to trace the beginnings of animal law as a legal discipline and analyze the thought processes of its leaders, how the surrounding animal rights movement influenced the direction of animal law, and how the choices that were made shaped the foundation and growth of this area of the law. This article is written in the first person, because I don’t wish to mislead the reader who might assume that I am a dispassionate historian. I am an animal rights lawyer; the people described herein are my respected colleagues. | Article |
| The History of the RSPCA | unknown | Royal Society for Protection of Animals |
This short article relates the formation and early history of the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals. |
Article |
| The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act: Deficiencies and Proposed Amendments | Jennifer L. Mariucci | 4 Journal of Animal Law 149 (2008) |
This note touches on the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and the deficiencies in the current version that undermine the statute’s intended purpose of ensuring a humane slaughter for all animals. This note analyzes the statute, compares it to comparable statutes from around the world, and suggests alterations to ensure that the statue fulfills its goal. This note also includes proposed statutory language that implements suggested changes. |
Article |
| The Humane Research and Testing Act: Advancing Science by Creating | Paul A. Locke, Mikalah Singer and Thomas Hartung | ALTEX 38(4), 2021 | This letter examines the proposed alternatives to animals in biomedical research and the Humane Research and Testing Act (HRTA) from 2021. | Article |
| The Humane Society of the United States, et al v. Mike Johanns, et al |
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and for a Preliminary Injunction, and Request for a Hearing requesting that the Court, “temporarily and preliminarily enjoi[n] and declar[e] unlawful a Final Rule just promulgated by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (“FSIS”) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) that creates a “fee-for-service” inspection system designed to facilitate the continued transport and slaughter of American horses for human consumption abroad.” In an memorandum opinion, the court denied plaintiff's motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction because it found that plaintiffs do not demonstrate the factors necessary for the court to issue a preliminary injunction. |
Pleading | ||
| The Humane Society of the United States, Plaintiff v. Amazon.com, Inc., JOHN DOE d/b/a UNDERGROUND, PITBULL BREEDERS ASSOCIATION | The Plaintiff The Humane Society of the United States filed this complaint alleging unlawful trade practices pursuant to the Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”), D.C. CODE ANN. § 28-3904. This action for statutory penalties and appropriate injunctive relief arises from Defendants’ purposeful marketing, sale, and shipment of graphic dog fighting videos and cockfighting magazines in violation of federal criminal prohibitions and District of Columbia animal welfare laws. The videos and magazines depict and/or describe actual animal cruelty, as well as animal fights staged for the purposes of: (1) producing and selling more copies of the videos for commercial gain; and (2) unlawfully promoting the criminal enterprises of dog fighting and cockfighting. In particular, the magazines contain hundreds of criminal solicitations and feature advertisements for fighting birds, fighting dogs, and other contraband that render them unlawful under the following statutory schemes: federal Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2132 et seq .; the federal Depiction of Animal Cruelty Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 48; the D.C. Cruelty to Animals Statute, D.C. CODE ANN. §§ 22-1015(a)(1), (a)(5); the federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371; and the D.C. conspiracy law, D.C. CODE ANN. § 22-1805a(a). | Pleading | ||
| The Hunt Club | Hunt Club | http://www.huntingtop10.com/outfitters/il/ilof3/index.html |
This advertisement for "The Hunt Club" indicates it provides lodging, meals, and hunts of waterfowl and big game on its 16,000 preserve. It also adds that it has a "trophy management policy" with regard to hunts of "trophy" deer on a 4,000 acre archery area. |
Article |
| The Inadequate Protection of ANnimals Against Cruel Animal Husbandry Practices Under United States Law | Nicole Fox | 17 Whittier L. Rev. 145 |
This article looks at available legal protections for all farmed animals, and recommends that Congress enact stricter animal welfare laws. |
Article |
| THE INJUSTICE OF ANIMAL WELFARE: A REVIEW OF ANIMALS, PROPERTY, AND THE LAW | Priscilla N. Cohn | 2 Animal L. 207 (1996) | This article provides a review of the book "Animals, Property, and the Law." | Article |
| THE INJUSTICE OF ANIMAL WELFARE: A REVIEW OF ANIMALS, PROPERTY, AND THE LAW | Priscilla N. Cohn | 2 Animal L. 207 (1996) | This article provides a review of the book "Animals, Property, and the Law" by Gary Francione regarding the differences between animal rights and animal welfare. | Article |