Results
Displaying 5921 - 5930 of 6638
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Agency Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nason v. Stone Hill Realty Association | 1996 WL 1186942 (Mass. 1996) | A tenant with multiple sclerosis took in her mother's cat when her mother became ill. The housing authority had a no pets policy and requested that the tenant remove the pet from the premises. The tenant in turn offered a letter from her physician stating that "there would be serious negative consequences for her health if she was compelled to remove the cat." The court held that the tenant did not meet her burden of proving a nexus between the cat and her multiple sclerosis, reasoning that the physician's note does not state that the cat is necessary to alleviate her symptoms and that a more reasonable accommodation may be available. | Case | ||
| In re: JAMES J. EVERHART | 56 Agric. Dec. 1400 (1997) | 1997 WL 655550 (U.S.D.A.) | Respondent's inability to pay civil penalty is not consideration in determining civil penalties assessed under Animal Welfare Act. | Case | |
| Guides for creating slideshows |
To find the link to any slideshow click on Structure, then Views, scrolling down to the slideshow you're looking for, and you'll see a link like /caucaseco-case. |
Policy | |||
| LA - Captive Wildlife - §115. Possession of Potentially Dangerous Wild Quadrupeds and Non-Human Primates | 76 LA ADC Pt V, § 115 | La. Admin Code. tit. 76, pt. V, § 115 | This Louisiana regulation states that the possession of certain potentially dangerous quadrupeds, big exotic cats, and non-human primates poses significant hazards to public safety and health, is detrimental to the welfare of the animals, and may have negative impacts on conservation and recovery of some threatened and endangered species. As a result, except as provided, it is unlawful to import into, possess, purchase or sell within the state of Louisiana, by any means whatsoever including but not limited to transactions conducted via the internet, any of the following species: cougar or mountain lion (Felis concolor); black bear (Ursus americanus); grizzly bear (Ursus arctos); polar bear (Ursus maritimus); red wolf (Canis rufus); gray wolf (Canis lupus); wolf dog hybrid (Canis lupus or Canis rufus x Canis familiarus); all non-human primates. While the prohibition against wolf-dog hybrids expired January 1, 1997, the regulation cautions persons that local ordinances or other state regulations may prohibit possession of these animals. | Administrative | |
| VA - Vehicle - § 3.2-6504.1. Civil immunity; forcible entry of motor vehicle to remove unattended companion animal. | Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6504.1 | VA ST § 3.2-6504.1 | This Virginia law was signed by the Governor on April 1, 2016. The law provides that no law-enforcement officer, firefighter, emergency medical services personnel, or animal control officer who in good faith forcibly enters a motor vehicle in order to remove an unattended companion animal that is at risk of serious bodily injury or death shall be liable for any property damage to the vehicle entered or injury to the animal resulting from such forcible entry and removal of the animal, unless such property damage or injury results from gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct. | Statute | |
| US - Marine Mammals- Marine Mammal Protection Act | 16 USC 1361 - 1421h | The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) is the main regulatory vehicle that protects marine mammal species and their habitats in an effort to main sustainable populations. In doing so, the statute outlines prohibitions, required permits, criminal and civil penalties, and international aspects in addressing marine mammals. Included in the MMPA are provisions to protect dolphins from ocean vessels that harvest tuna with purse seine nets; provisions to protect polar bear; provisions that establish the Marine Mammal Commission and that agency's duties; and provisions for the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program, including funding for standing response and unusual mortality events. The Act's 1972 Legislative History is also included. | Statute | ||
| MA - Dog - Consolidated Dog Laws | M.G.L.A. 2 § 14; M.G.L.A. 112 § 12Z; M.G.L.A. 128A § 14E; M.G.L.A. 266 § 47; M.G.L.A. 140 § 136A - § 174F; M.G.L.A. 129 § 39G; M.G.L.A. 131 § 20, 21, 21A, 82 | MA ST 2 § 14; MA ST 112 § 12Z; MA ST 128A § 14E; MA ST 266 § 47; MA ST 140 § 136A - § 174F; MA ST 129 § 39G; MA ST 131 § 20, 21, 21A, 82 | These Massachusetts statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include licensing laws, dangerous dog laws, and rabies vaccination provisions. | Statute | |
| US - Invasive - Chapter 67. Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control | 16 USCS 4701 - 4751 | The Act focuses on all aquatics, including aquatic plants. The Act created the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, which is an intergovernmental organization, administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, committed to preventing and controlling aquatic nuisance species and implementing the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act. The Task Force coordinates Federal governmental efforts dealing with aquatic nuisance species with those of state and local governments, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, and the private sector. | Statute | ||
| Taft v. Taft | 433 S.E.2d 667 (Ga.App.,1993) | 209 Ga.App. 499 (Ga.App.,1993) |
In this Georgia case, an adult son, who was business invitee, brought an action against his father to recover for injuries sustained when he was attacked by his father's bull while attempting to corral it for market. The lower court entered judgment for son, and father then appealed. The Court of Appeals, held that it for the jury to determine questions as to proximate cause, viciousness of bull, assumption of risk, superior or equal knowledge, contributory negligence, and negligence of the plaintiff. The failure of the trial court to charge adequately on proximate cause required a reversal, notwithstanding appellant's lack of a timely and proper request for a specific proximate cause charge. Judgment reversed.
|
Case | |
| Warboys v. Proulx | 303 F.Supp.2d 111 (D. Conn. 2004) | 2004 WL 234395 (D. Conn. 2004) |
Pitbull owner filed suit seeking compensatory damages arising from the shotting and killing of his dog by police. Defendants removed the action based on federal question jurisdiction and moved for summary judgment, and the dog owner moved to amend the complaint. Motions granted. |
Case |