Results
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Agency Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HI - Domestic Violence - Chapter 586. Domestic Abuse Protective Orders | H R S § 586-4 | HI ST § 586-4 | This law reflects Hawaii's provision for temporary restraining orders in cases of domestic abuse. The ex parte temporary restraining order may also enjoin or restrain both of the parties from taking, concealing, removing, threatening, physically abusing, or otherwise disposing of any animal identified to the court as belonging to a household, until further order of the court (see (c)(4)). | Statute | |
| Pepper v. Triplet | 864 So.2d 181 (La. 2004) | 2004 WL 97101 (La. 2004) |
Neighbor sued dog owner for injuries resulting from dog bite. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff must show that, first, that the injuries could have been prevented by the dog owner and that the plaintiff did not provoke the dog to attack, second, that the dog presented an unreasonable risk of harm, and third, that the owner failed to exercise reasonable care. Plaintiff did not accomplish this. Reversed. (Extensive history of state dog bit law.) |
Case | |
| Bronk v. Ineichen | 54 F.3d 425 (7th Cir. 1995) | 54 F.3d 425 (7th Cir. 1995) |
Plaintiffs appealed decision of district court denying their claim that defendants violated the Federal Fair Housing Act for failing to allow a hearing dog in their rental unit as a reasonable accommodation for their hearing disability. The landlord denied the request, alleging that the dog was not a "hearing dog," and that the tenants did not have a legitimate need for the dog because the dog lacked professional training. The Court of Appeals held that if the dog was not necessary as a hearing dog then the plaintiffs were not entitled to the dog as a reasonable accommodation under the FHA. Also, the court held that a disabled person must meet two standards in arguing that an accommodation be made: (1) the accommodation must facilitate the disabled person's ability to function; and (2) the accommodation must survive a cost-benefit balancing that takes both parties' needs into account. The court vacated the decision of the lower court and ordered a new trial because of misleading jury instructions. |
Case | |
| IN - Wild Animal - Rule 11. Wild Animal Possession Permits. | Ind. Admin. Code tit. 312, r. 9-11-1 to 15 | 312 IAC 9-11-1 to 15 | This chapter of regulations provides the rules and requirements for possession of wild animals in Indiana. | Administrative | |
| Building housing night monkeys used in malaria research at FUCEP. | Slideshow Images | ||||
| Tillett v. Bureau of Land Management | Slip Copy (unpublished decision), 2016 WL 1312014 (D. Mont. Apr. 4, 2016) | In this case, plaintiff (proceeding pro se) filed suit against the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) challenging its management of wild horses on the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range (PMWHR). Plaintiff filed suit challenging BLM’s fertility control and gather programs. BLM argued that plaintiff’s claims should be denied as a matter of summary judgment. The court ultimately held that plaintiff failed to provide any “legal authority” or “jurisdictional basis” for the remedies in which she was seeking. The court held that BLM was within its own authority to rely on its own data and surveys of its programs and was under no obligation to review its programs based on plaintiff’s alleged observations. Finally, the court held in favor of BLM as a matter of summary judgment. | Case | ||
| NJ - Lien, horse stable - 2A:44-51. Right of lien; retention of property when amount due unpaid | N. J. S. A. 2A:44-51 - 52 | NJ ST 2A:44-51 - 52 | This New Jersey law relates to liens on those who keep horses. The law states that every keeper of a livery stable or boarding and exchange stable shall have a lien on all animals left in livery, for board, sale or exchange (and upon all carriages, wagons, sleighs and harness left for storage, sale or exchange) for the amount due for the board and keep of such animal. The keeper has the right, without process of law, to retain the same until the amount of such indebtedness is discharged. Note that the law states “keeper of a livery stable” shall include, but need not be limited to, a proprietor of a stable, a trainer, a veterinarian, a farrier, or any other person who has a financial relationship with the owner of the horse. | Statute | |
| MA - Veterinary - Veterinary Practice Laws | M.G.L.A. 112 § 54 - 60 | MA ST 112 § 54 - 60 | These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners. | Statute | |
| US - Seal - Chapter 24. Conservation and Protection of North Pacific Fur Seals. | 16 USC 1151 - 1187 | The Fur Seal Act of 1966 prohibited, except under specified conditions, the taking, including transportation, importing or possession, of fur seals and sea otters. Exceptions are authorized for Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos who dwell on the coasts of the North Pacific Ocean, who are permitted to take fur seals and dispose of their skins. The statute also authorized the Secretary of Interior to conduct scientific research on the fur seal resources of the North Pacific Ocean. | Statute | ||
| US - Marine Mammals - Protected Species Special Exception Permits | 2001 WL 738878 (F.R.) | FR Doc. 01-16600 (2001) |
NMFS is proposing to amend the regulations for permits to capture or import marine mammals for purposes of public display under MMPA. The proposed revisions would implement amendments to the MMPA enacted in 1994, affecting marine mammals held captive for public display purposes and clarify the public display requirements relating to permits to capture or import, transport or transfer, and export marine mammals. |
Administrative |