|Title||Citation||Alternate Citation||Agency Citation||Summary||Type|
|De Lanoy v. Taylor||--- P.3d ----, 300 Or. App. 517 (2019)||This Oregon case involves a dispute over who now||Case|
|TX - Rabies control - § 169.22. Definitions||25 TX ADC § 169.22||25 TAC § 169.22||This code is the definition section for the Texas Administrative Code's regulations on rabies control.||Administrative|
|WA - Dog - Consolidated Dog Laws||West's RCWA 4.24.410; 9.08.010 - 90; 9A.76.200; 9.91.170 - 175; 16.10.010 - 40; 16.54.010 - 40; 16.70.010 - 60; 36.49.020 - 070; 77.12.315; 77.15.240, 245, 440; 77.32.525; 77.32.540||WA ST 4.24.410; 9.08.010 - 90; WA ST 9A.76.200; WA ST 9.91.170 - 175; 16.10.010 - 40; 16.54.010 - 40; 16.70.010 - 60; 36.49.020 - 070; 77.12.315; 77.15.240, 245, 440; 77.32.525; 77.32.540||These Washington statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include vaccination requirements, dog control zones in municipalities, dangerous dog laws, and provisions concerning hunting with dogs.||Statute|
|Sinclair v. Okata||874 F. Supp. 1051 (D.Alaska,1994)||
Defendants are able to present a genuine question of fact regarding whether they were on notice of their dog's vicious propensity given their characterization of the four prior biting incidents as "behavioral responses common to all dogs." Defendants' expert concluded that each time, Anchor's responses were "natural" or instinctive. Plaintiffs offer no evidence, through expert testimony or otherwise, to refute the opinion of defendants' expert.
|Noway - Cruelty - Norwegian Animal Welfare Act (2010)||Norwegian Animal Welfare Act||
This comprehensive Animal Welfare Act from Norway covers nearly all aspects in the treatment of animals, including research, farming, and general care. The intention of this Act is to promote good animal welfare and respect for animals.
|Colleen Harrington v. David Hovanec, and DOES 1 through 20 inclusive||This California complaint for damages raises five causes of action: (1) gross negligence; (2) trespass to chattel; (3) conversion; (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (5) violation of California Civil Code Section 3340 (related to damage to animals as property). The lawsuit arose from the negligent and/or intentional shooting of plaintiff's dog by defendant in May of 2004. According to the complaint, plaintiff's dog was shot at least thirteen times by defendant's two different guns.||Pleading|
|TX - Impound - Chapter 823. Animal Shelters||V. T. C. A., Health & Safety Code § 823.001 - 009||TX HEALTH & S § 823.001 - 009||Chapter 823 enumerates the standards by which animal shelters shall comply. It sets forth confinement requirements, permissible forms of euthanasia, and personnel requirements.||Statute|
|Pennsylvania Statute Laws 1920: Article 16: Agriculture Laws||14 Pa. Stat. §§ 394-402 (1920)||Pennsylvania laws concerning the treatment of animals in agriculture. The laws cover such topics as maiming and disfiguring animals to the transportation of an animal.||Statute|
|CO - Denver - Breed - Sec. 8-55. Pit bulls prohibited.||Sec. 8.55||
This Denver, Colorado ordinance provides that it is unlawful for any person to own, possess, keep, exercise control over, maintain, harbor, transport, or sell within the city any pit bull. A pit bull is defined broadly as "any dog that is an American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of any one (1) or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards established by the American Kennel Club or United Kennel Club for any of the above breeds." [emphasis added] A person who applied for and received a special pit bull license before August 7, 1989 (date of the publication of the ordinance) and who maintains the pit bull in compliance with the requirements of the ordinance may keep a pit bull.
|NY - Education - § 809. Instruction in the humane treatment of animals||McKinney's Education Law § 809||NY EDUC § 809||This New York law requires those officers, boards or commissions authorized or required to prescribe courses of instruction that receive public funding to establish a humane education curriculum as described. Additionally, the law states that any school that uses animal for study must provide: (1) appropriate quarters; (2) sufficient space for the normal behavior and postural requirements of the species; (3) proper ventilation, lighting, and temperature control; (4) adequate food and clean drinking water; and (5) quarters which shall be cleaned on a regular basis and located in an area where undue stress and disturbance are minimized. With regard to dissection, the law allows any student who expresses a moral or religious objection to performing or witnessing the dissection of an animal to be provided the opportunity to undertake an alternative project. This request by the student must be substantiated in writing by the student's parent or legal guardian. Students who decline dissection are not to be penalized under the law and parents and students must be notified about their rights under this law. Finally, the law prohibits certain experimentation on live vertebrate animals.||Statute|