Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivey v. Hamlin (Unpublished) | 2002 WL 1254444 (Tenn.Ct.App.)(Not reproted in S.W.3rd) |
This is an action for damages for the deliberate killing of a dog by a Deputy Sheriff that was alleging terrorizing the neighborhood. In finding for defendant-officer, the court noted that the consensus among the courts is that a vicious dog is a public nuisance and that governments and their agents have broad power to protect the public from these animals. The court thus found the officer acted reasonably under the circumstances and had a qualified immunity defense. |
Case | |
| IL - Education - Act 112. Dissection Alternatives Act | 105 ILCS 112/1 - 112/99 | IL ST CH 105 § 112/1 - 112/99 | This comprises Illinois' Dissection Alternatives Act. The act requires the State Board of Education to make guidelines that give notice to parents and students on which courses ordinarily involve dissection of animals and whether or not alternative projects for learning are available. A school may excuse a student enrolled in a course in which students are ordinarily expected to perform, participate in, or observe dissection who objects for any reason to performing, participating in, or observing that dissection and instead allow the student to complete an alternative project. The act defines "student" as those pupils at a public or private elementary or secondary school in Illinois. No student is to be penalized or discriminated against for refusing to perform, participate in, or observe dissection. | Statute |
| WA - Beavers - 77.32.585. Release of wild beavers | West's RCWA 77.32.585 | WA ST 77.32.585 | This Washington law states that the department shall permit the release of wild beavers on public and private lands with agreement from the property owner under specified conditions. | Statute |
| PA - Dog - § 550. General immunity from noise | 3 P.S. § 550 | PA ST 3 P.S. § 550 | This Pennsylvania statute provides that all owners and operators of dog training and special retriever training areas licensed by the Pennsylvania Game Commission shall be exempt and immune from any civil action or criminal prosecution in any manner relating to noise provided they were and remain in compliance with any applicable noise control laws or ordinances at the time the permit for establishment of the training area was authorized. | Statute |
| Animal Liberation Ltd v Department of Environment & Conservation | [2007] NSWSC 221 |
The applicants sought to restrain a proposed aerial shooting of pigs and goats on interlocutory basis pending the outcome of a suit claiming the aerial shooting would constitute cruelty. It was found that the applicants did not have a 'special interest' and as such did not have standing to bring the injunction. The application was dismissed. |
Case | |
| Chile - Wildlife - Decreto 531, 1967 | Decreto 531, 1967 (125338) | This Decreto ratifies The Convention for the Protection of Flora, Fauna, and Natural Scenic Beauty of the Americas, signed in Washington on October 12, 1940. | Statute | |
| TX - Wildlife, wolves - Subchapter B. Nongame Animals | V. T. C. A., Parks & Wildlife Code § 63.101 - 104 | TX PARKS & WILD § 63.101 - 104 | Under these Texas statutes, no person may hunt, sell, buy or possess a live or dead bat, with exceptions. A violation is a Class C misdemeanor. It is a felony to possess, transport, receive, or release a live wolf in Texas (with exceptions). It is a class B misdemeanor to sell a living armadillo in Texas (with exceptions). | Statute |
| NV - Domestic Violence - Chapter 33. Injunctions. Orders for Protection Against Domestic Violence. | N. R. S. 33.018, 33.030 | NV ST 33.018, 33.030 | In Nevada, a knowing, purposeful or reckless course of conduct intended to harass the other such as injuring or killing an animal, is included in their definition of Domestic Violence. A victim can then get a Protection Order and enjoin the adverse party from physically injuring, threatening to injure or taking possession of any animal that is owned or kept by the applicant or minor child, either directly or through an agent. | Statute |
| Lamare v. North Country Animal League | 743 A.2d 598 (Vt. 1999) |
Owners of a licensed dog that escaped while not wearing its tags filed an action against a local animal shelter that ultimately released the dog to others for adoption. The court held that the town's actions fully complied with its animal control ordinance and that its ordinance provided ample notice to plaintiffs consistent with state law and due process requirements. |
Case | |
| Wild Horse Observers Ass'n, Inc. v. New Mexico Livestock Bd. | 363 P.3d 1222 (N.M., 2015) | Certiorari Denied, Oct. 13, 2015, No. 35,504. | This case dealt with a determination made by the New Mexico Livestock Board that a group of undomesticated, unowned, free-roaming horses (the Placitas horses) were “livestock” and “estray” rather than wild horses under the Livestock Code. The Wild Horse Observers Association filed suit against the Board, but their claim was dismissed by the District Court. The Court of Appeals held that 1) the horses were not “livestock”, as they had never been domesticated and therefore could not be “estray”; 2) the Board had a statutory duty to test and relocate wild horses captured on public land; and 3) the Plaintiffs did state a claim that was sufficient to survive the motion to dismiss. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings | Case |