Results

Displaying 5821 - 5830 of 6592
Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type
Whiteaker v. City of Southgate 651 F. Supp. 3d 893 (E.D. Mich. 2023) 2023 WL 317457 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 19, 2023) The plaintiff (“Whiteaker”) filed this action against Defendant, the City of Southgate, Michigan for violations of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) and Michigan's Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act (“PDCRA”). Specifically, Whiteaker contends that the City violated the FHA by denying Whiteaker's request for an exemption from City Ordinance 610.13, which prohibits City residents from maintaining chickens (or other typical farm animals) on their property. The events underlying this action began after Whiteaker moved to Southgate in early March 2021. On March 24, 2021, Whiteaker was issued a citation by the City for a violation of Ordinance 610.13. Whiteaker appeared in district court to defend himself, claiming he had a right to keep the chickens under Michigan's Right to Farm Act. However, it turned out the Right to Farm law was inapplicable because Whiteaker's chicken coop was within 250 feet of a dwelling. Thus, Whiteaker was issued a second citation in May and was denied a permit to keep the chickens by the city. Since Whiteaker was a longtime sufferer of depression and anxiety, he sought a waiver from the ordinance as a reasonable accommodation for his disability and presented a letter from his mental health provider as support. Again, his request was denied by the City. In the instant motion for summary judgement by the City, the court examined the "reasonableness" of Whiteaker's request for a reasonable accommodation under the FHA. The court found that the balancing test required under the FHA, to wit, weighing Whiteaker's disability-related need to keep the chickens as a source of comfort and support against the City's claims that the chickens pose a threat to public health, is a triable issue of fact. Indeed, the court observed that the City's citation of documentation from the CDC only lists the "potential dangers" chickens can pose to public health without sufficient evidence to supports its claim that the chickens will burden the City financially and administratively. In contrast, Whiteaker claims a disability and has provided evidence of his disability. Likewise, as to the remaining elements of necessity and equal opportunity for a reasonable accommodation claim, the court again cites Whiteaker's evidentiary support for his claim of disability and need for the chickens to alleviate those symptoms against the fact the City has not presented any testimony, affidavits, or "evidence of any kind" to support its claim. Thus, the court denied the motion for summary judgment. Case
NH - Licenses - Chapter 466. Dogs and Cats. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 466:29 NH ST 466:29 This New Hampshire statute provides that, in the case of a rabies epidemic, the mayor and aldermen of a city or the selectmen of a town may order that all dogs within the limits of the city or town shall be muzzled or restrained from running at large during the time prescribed by such order. Any offending dog may be impounded. Statute
MI - Cruelty - 752.91. Sale of dyed or artificially colored baby chicks, rabbits or ducklings M. C. L. A. 752.91 - 92 MI ST 752.91 - 92 This law makes it unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to sell, or offer for sale, any baby chicks, rabbits, ducklings, or other fowl or game which have been dyed or otherwise artificially colored. Violation is a misdemeanor. Statute
Bushnell v. Mott 254 S.W.3d 451 (Tex.,2008) 51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 681(2008); 2008 WL 820680

In this Texas case, the plaintiff (Bushnell) brought an action against the defendant (Mott) for her injuries sustained when defendant's dogs attacked plaintiff. The district court granted summary judgment to defendant. The Texas Supreme Court reversed, and held that the owner of a dog not known to be vicious owes a duty to attempt to stop the dog from attacking a person after the attack has begun, and Mott's behavior after the attack had begun raises an issue of material fact whether Mott failed to exercise ordinary care over her dogs.

Case
European Union - Farming - Protection of Laying Hens Official Journal L 203, 3 August 1999, pp. 53–57 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 1999/74/EC This Directive establishes minimum standards for the protection of laying hens, particularly in respect to the equipment, drinking and feeding conditions, and facilities where the hens are kept. It does not apply to establishments with fewer than 350 laying hens, nor to establishments rearing breeding laying hens. It only applies to hens of the species Gallus gallus which have reached laying maturity and are kept for production of eggs not intended for hatching. Administrative
OR - Trusts - 130.185. Pet trust. O. R. S. § 130.185 OR ST § 130.185 This statute comprises Oregon's Pet Trust law based on the Uniform Trust Code. Under the law, a trust may be created to provide for the care of one or more animals that are alive during the settlor's lifetime. The trust terminates upon the death of the animal or, if the trust was created to provide for the care of more than one animal, upon the death of the last surviving animal. Statute
IN - Cattle Slaughter - THE PUNJAB PROHIBITION OF COW SLAUGHTER ACT, 1955 153 of 1956 The Act, specific to the state of Punjab, criminalizes the slaughter of cows and bulls, bullocks, heifers and calves. Beef may not to be sold. The Act provides for the establishment of institutions for the maintenance and care of uneconomic cows. Offences under the Act are punishable with fines or imprisonment. Statute
MO - Impound - Chapter 273. Dogs--Cats. Local Option Dog Tax. V. A. M. S. 273.100 MO ST 273.100 This Missouri statute provides that every city or town marshal of every incorporated city or town shall seize and impound all dogs found running at large without collars around their necks. These dogs will be kept for a period of one week after which they shall be put to death by humane methods. The statute further states that any marshal who shall fail or refuse to take up and impound any such dog shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof fined not less than five dollars nor more than twenty-five dollars. Statute
NM - Police Animals - § 13-6-1. Disposition of obsolete, worn-out or unusable tangible personal property NMSA 1978, § 13-6-1 NM ST § 13-6-1 This New Mexico statute concerns tangible personal property of governing local and state agencies. Paragraph L deals with retired K-9 dogs. The section states, "[i]f the secretary of public safety finds that the K-9 dog presents no threat to public safety, the K-9 dog shall be released from public ownership as provided in this subsection. The K-9 dog shall first be offered to its trainer or handler free of charge. If the trainer or handler does not want to accept ownership of the K-9 dog, then the K-9 dog shall be offered to an organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 free of charge. If both of the above fail, the K-9 dog shall only be sold to a qualified individual found capable of providing a good home to the animal." Statute
State v. Gaines 64 Ohio App. 3d 230 (Oh App. 1990) 64 Ohio App. 3d 230

Defendant, who pleaded guilty to 2 counts of dogfighting, challenged the constitutionality of the dogfighting statute and appealed a court-imposed forfeiture of cash and other seized items. The Court of Appeals ruled that: (1) dogfighting statute was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad; (2) statute did not violate equal protection or constitute cruel and unusual punishment on ground that violation constitutes fourth-degree felony while violation of statute prohibiting other animal fights is only a fourth-degree misdemeanor; and (3) despite guilty plea, forfeiture of cash and other items was erroneous absent establishment of direct connection with defendant's illegal dogfighting activities.

Case

Pages