Results

Displaying 81 - 90 of 6638
Title Citation Alternate Citation Summary Type
City of Sausalito v. O'Neill 386 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2004) 386 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2004)

A City sought to prevent the National Park Service from implementing a development plan in a nearby recreational area claiming the Park service had violated various environmental statutes.  The trial court held the City did not have standing to assert most of its claims and lost on the merits of the remaining claims.  The Court of Appeals held the City did have standing to assert all of its claims, but lost on the merits of all its claims except those under the Coastal Zone Management Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. 

Case
Silver v. United States 726 A.2d 191 (D.C. App. 1999)

Appellants were each convicted of cruelty to animals, in violation of D.C. Code Ann. §   22-801 (1996), and of engaging in animal fighting, in violation of §   22-810. On appeal, both appellants contended that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions of animal cruelty, and of animal fighting. The appellate court found that the proof was sufficient. Each appellant also contended that his convictions merged because animal cruelty was a lesser-included offense of animal fighting. The appellate court found that each crime required proof of an element that the other did not. Appellants' convictions did not merge.

Case
Wales - Fur, mink - The Mink Keeping (Prohibition) (Wales) Order 2012 2012 No. (W. ) An Order imposing an absolute prohibition upon the keeping of mink in Wales. Statute
Robinson v. Pezzat 818 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2016) 2016 WL 1274044 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 1, 2016) Plaintiff filed suit against two police officers and the District of Columbia after the officers shot and killed her dog while executing a warrant to search her home. She brought a § 1983 claim, alleging that the officers seized her property in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s ruling for summary judgment, holding that a jury could find in favor of the plaintiff based on her witness testimony that the dog was lying down when it was first shot. Additionally, the court maintained summary judgment for the second police officer, McLeod, who shot and killed the dog after it bit Officer Pezzat and charged forward. Case
MA - Exotic pet, breeding - Chapter 131. Inland Fisheries and Game and Other Natural Resources. M.G.L.A. 131 § 23 MA ST 131 § 23 Massachusetts bans private possession of exotic pets, and requires licenses for those who deal and propagate wild species for other reasons. The Massachusetts director of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife also issues a list of exempted species for which no permit is needed. Statute
DE - Ordinances - Local ordinances (dogs) 7 Del.C. § 1740 - Repealed by 77 Laws 2010, ch. 428, § 5, eff. July 1, 2010 DE ST TI 7 § 1740 [Repealed in 20210]. This Delaware statutes provides that nothing shall prevent a local municipality from enacting measures or a program for the control of dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs. Statute
Animal Welfare Institute v. Martin 623 F.3d 19 (C.A.1 (Me.), 2010). 2010 WL 4104633 (C.A.1 (Me.)).

Animal welfare organizations sued the State of Maine under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to stop the authorization of trapping activity that affected Canada lynx. The Court of Appeals held that such organizations had standing to sue, but that the District Court did not err in its refusal to grant a permanent injunction banning foothold traps or other relief.

Case
Fitch v. Eiseman 2000 WL 34545801 (Alaska 2000) (unpublished opinion) The trial court approved a divorcing couple’s agreement for dogs to be with their children (and so travel to the husband's and wife’s houses as part of a shared custody agreement of their children).  The wife did not abide by the agreement, so the Supreme Court remanded back to the trial court to determine sole ownership of the dog. Case
NY - Lien upon strays - § 310. Lien upon strays McKinney's Town Law § 310 NY TOWN § 310 If any person finds any livestock on their enclosed land, or finds livestock on their land doing damage, and the livestock did not come from adjoining lands because of the refusal or neglect to erect a division fence required by law, such person may have a lien over all other liens on such livestock. The lien shall last for as long as such person retains possession of the livestock, and as long as the damage remains to his land, until the damages, charges, fees, and costs are paid for keeping the livestock. Statute
Revista Brasileira de Direito Animal Volume 19

SUMÁRIO

EDITORIAL

Heron Gordilho………………………………………………

Policy

Pages