Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scent Identification Procedures in the U.S. Have Different History and Different Procedures From Those Conducted in Europe | John Ensminger | Animal Legal & Historical Center | Scent lineups, designed to use a dog’s behavior to establish that two scents, one from a crime scene and one from a suspect, derive from the same person, have been conducted in radically different ways in the U.S. and Europe. In the U.S., scent lineups are often performed outdoors, in fields or parking lots, while in Europe they have for decades only been conducted indoors, often in canine forensic laboratories. In the U.S., lineups of individuals, as opposed to scents taken from individuals, have been part of standard practice in some jurisdictions until recently, but this has not been done in Europe for decades. Tracking of a suspect through a police station has been accepted as a formal identification procedure in the U.S., but not in Europe. | Article |
| Designing a Model Dog Park Law | John J. Ensminger and Frances Breitkopf | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This article was originally posted by the Animal Legal & Historical Center five years ago and the authors feel it has been in need of revision for some time. We will from now update the article periodically in this location so that those readers who are involved in creating dog parks, and legislators and their staff involved in modifying laws and regulations to take into account the significance of dog parks in the legal and governmental systems of states, counties, and municipalities, can have what benefit our analysis may provide concerning developments relevant to their interests. Also, those committees and groups that must decide on rules for use of a dog park to be posted at an entrance gate can understand what we think is appropriate and reasonable for a list of requirements, given that users will not want to spend large amounts of time reading a legal text before getting a dog inside the park. The article begins with our views on how dog park law has evolved in recent years, then discusses the laws and regulations that apply to dog parks and similar spaces. It then reviews the rules that often apply to the users of dog parks around the United States. Finally, the model laws and rules are contained in the last section. The model law provisions are somewhat unusual in contemplating the adoption of provisions at a number of legislative levels. Thus there is no single proposed law, but rather a collection of suggested modifications of statutes and regulations, some of which may be appropriately contained in a statute in one jurisdiction but a regulation in another, depending on where related issues are addressed in the codes and rules issued by a state, county, municipality, or other park-regulating entity. [1] | Article |
| Evolving Functions of Service and Therapy Animals and the Implications for Public Accommodation Access Rules | John Ensminger and Frances Breitkopf | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This in-depth article presents the various categories of service animals and the functions they perform. It then examines the federal and state laws and regulations that control access to public accommodation and transportation. The authors conclude by suggesting that a uniform system of licensing and tagging would alleviate the confusion presented by current laws. |
Article |
| Cueing and Probable Cause: Research May Increase Defense Attacks on and Judicial Skepticism of Detection Dog Evidence | John J. Ensminger and L.E. Papet | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
The Supreme Court has recognized the uniquely non-intrusive nature of a canine sniff means that using dogs in certain situations does not involve a search. This has encouraged the use of detection dogs in law enforcement, and limited the costs associated with producing evidence of canine alerts in court. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court’s decisions do not mean that any claim that a dog may have alerted can justify a further search, and courts have recognized that a dog must be reliable for an alert to have this consequence. Thus, a high level of reliability must be expected of a canine team, and a failure to conduct adequate training or maintain complete records to establish that reliability will not exclude the possibility that a called alert may actually have been cued, precluding the use of the alert at trial. |
Article |
| Walking Search Warrants: Canine Forensics and Police Culture after Florida v. Harris | John J. Ensminger and L.E. Papet | 10 J. Animal & Nat. Resource L. 1 | The 1983 Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Place set initial parameters to tell police how and when dogs could be used at airports and in a number of other environments. Recently, narcotics detection dogs have come to be considered “walking search warrants” by their human counterparts. Particularly since the United States Supreme Court decided Florida v. Harris in 2013, such attitudes in law enforcement have been reinforced as to the use of such dogs in public places. This article explores the interaction of canine forensics and police culture, particularly focusing on the Supreme Court’s decision in Harris. | Article |
| There Are No Bad Dogs, Only Bad Owners: Replacing Strict Liability With A Negligence Standard In Dog Bite Cases | Lynn A. Epstein | 13 Animal Law 129 (2006) |
Should the law treat dogs as vicious animals or loving family companions? This article analyzes common law strict liability as applied to dog bite cases and the shift to modern strict liability statutes, focusing on the defense of provocation. It discusses the inconsistency in the modern law treatment of strict liability in dog bite cases. The article then resolves why negligence is the proper cause of action in dog bite cases. The Author draws comparisons among dog owner liability in dog bite cases, parental liability for a child’s torts, and property owner liability for injuries caused by his property. The Author concludes by proposing a negligence standard to be applied in dog bite cases. |
Article |
| Resolving Confusion in Pet Owner Tort Cases: Recognizing Pets' Anthropomorphic Qualities Under a Property Classification | Lynn A. Epstein | 26 SILULJ 31 (Fall, 2001) |
The author examines the important role pets play in our lives in contrast with their nominal assessed market value by courts. The author then provides a uniform suggestion that will enable courts to standardize an owner's pet loss claim. Courts should continue to classify pets as property, yet relax the classification standard to permit a flexible market value analysis that includes the right to assert a punitive damage claim as a means of providing adequate and fair recompense to the grieving pet owner. |
Article |
| To What Extent Does Wealth Maximization Benefit Farmed Animals? A Law And Economics Approach To A Ban On Gestation Crates In Pig Production | Geoffrey C. Evans | 13 Animal Law 167 (2006) |
A law and economics approach in the current animals-as-property realm could be the most efficient way to gain protections for the billions of farmed animals that need them now. The wealth maximization theory allows for this because it recognizes human valuation of nonhuman interests. However, evidence shows that a market failure exists because of the discord between public will and animal industry practices. Where human valuation of nonhuman interests is underrepresented in the market and, therefore, a market fix is needed through legislation, animal advocates should evaluate the legislation’s economic impacts. In the case of a ban on gestation crates, as may be the case elsewhere, legislation may actually prove to be economically efficient, and thus gain the support of those who would not otherwise back such legislation. |
Article |
| Integrating Animal Interests into Our Legal System | David Favre | 10 Animal L. 87 (2004) |
This article explores the obstacles to obtaining legal rights for animals both within the animal rights movement and within the broader political context. The author examines in which arena legal change might best be sought--the courts, the legislature, state governments, or the federal government. Finally, it makes a number of suggestions as to what type of laws would be the most successful in advancing the interests of animals. |
Article |
| Detailed Discussion of Veterinarian Malpractice | David S. Favre | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This article provides a short history of the development of veterinary malpractice as a cause of action and also explores the elements of a malpractice suit. It further delineates the concepts of standard of care, proximate cause, and res ipsa loquitur. Defenses to malpractice actions are also discussed. |
Article |