Results
Displaying 5861 - 5870 of 6637
| Title | Citation | Alternate Citation | Agency Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AZ - Breed - § 20-1510. Homeowner's or renter's insurance; dog breeds | A. R. S. § 20-1510 | AZ ST § 20-1510 | This 2022 Arizona law states that the breed of a dog may not be the sole factor considered or used for any of the following purposes: (1) underwriting or actuarial processes for determining risk, liability or actual or potential losses related to claims involving dogs under a policy of insurance; or (2) questionnaires, surveys or other means of gathering information regarding ownership or possession of a dog or the presence of a dog on premises insured or to be insured under a policy of insurance. | Statute | |
| Scotland - Animal Welfare - Animals and Wildlife (Penalties, Protections and Powers) (Scotland) Act 2020 | Scotland Act 2020 | Scotland's 2020 legislation increased maximum available penalties for the most serious animal welfare offences, involving domesticated or wild animals, up to 5 years imprisonment and unlimited fines. Serious crimes include animal fighting and causing unnecessary suffering. The Act also prevents those who attack service animals in the course of their duties from relying on self-defence. Further, the Act requires the courts to consider whether disqualification orders are necessary to protect animal welfare, and to provide its reasons for reaching its decision in every case that reaches court. | Statute | ||
| European Union - Food Production - Regulations for Marketing Eggs | Official Journal L 2/1 , 05/01/2001 | No 5/2001 | This European Union regulation amends No 1907/90 of the marketing standards for eggs by making it compulsory to indicate the farming method on eggs. | Administrative | |
| European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals | A Council of Europe Convention to promote the welfare of pet animals. | Treaty | |||
| Index to Journal of Animal and Natural Resource Law |
Index for Animal and Natural Resource Law ReviewVolume #1 (2005) |
Policy | |||
| Gibson v. Donahue | 722 N.E.2d 646(2002) |
Plaintiff was injured when she was thrown from her horse while she was riding her horse in a city field. Plaintiff sued Defendant for her injuries because she was thrown from her horse after the horse was startled by the Defendant’s dogs, which were chasing the horse. The Defendant claimed that she was immune from liability under Ohio’s Equine Activity Liability Act. However, in this case of first impression, the court found that the EALA did not apply to Defendant because Plaintiff was not engaged in an “equine activity” at the time of the injury and the statute is not meant to apply to all third parties involved in an accident in which an equine was present. |
Case | ||
| MN - Ivory - 84.0896. Trade in prohibited animal parts prohibited | M. S. A. § 84.0896 | MN ST § 84.0896 | This Minnesota law, effective January 1, 2020, prohibits the sale of a "prohibited animal part." This is defined as a tooth or tusk from any species of elephant, hippopotamus, mammoth, mastodon, walrus, whale, or narwhal, or any piece thereof, whether raw or worked. Certain exceptions are written into the law including certain antiques (as defined), possession by a bona fide scientific or educational institution, and items expressly authorized under federal law. | Statute | |
| Lay v. Chamberlain | 2000 WL 1819060 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2000) (Not Reported in N.E.2d) | 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 5783 | Chamberlain owned a dog breeding kennel with over one hundred fifty dogs. An investigation was conducted when the Sheriff's Office received complaints about the condition of the animals. Observations indicated the kennel was hot, overcrowded, and poorly ventilated. The dogs had severely matted fur, were sick or injured, and lived in cages covered in feces. Dog food was moldy and water bowls were dirty. Many cages were stacked on top of other cages, allowing urine and feces to fall on the dogs below. A court order was granted to remove the dogs. The humane society, rescue groups, and numerous volunteers assisted by providing food, shelter, grooming and necessary veterinary care while Chamberlain's criminal trial was pending. Chamberlain was convicted of animal cruelty. The organizations and volunteers sued Chamberlain for compensation for the care provided to the animals. The trial court granted the award and the appellate court affirmed. Ohio code authorized appellees' standing to sue for the expenses necessary to prevent neglect to the animals. The evidence was sufficient to support an award for damages for the humane society, the rescue groups, and the individual volunteers that protected and provided for the well-being of the dogs during the months of the trial. | Case | |
| VT - Dogs, Wolf-hybrids - Consolidated Dog Laws | 20 V.S.A. § 3511 - 3513; 3541 - 3817, 3901 - 3915, 4301 - 4304; 10 V.S.A. § 5001 - 5009, § 4748 | VT ST T. 20 § 3511 - 3513; 3541 - 3817, 3901 - 3915, 4301 - 4304; VT ST T.10 § 5001 - 5009, § 4748 | These Vermont statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include licensing and control laws for both domestic dogs and wolf-hybrids, laws concerning the sale of dogs, and various wildlife/hunting laws that implicate dogs. | Statute | |
| Empacadora De Carnes De Fresnillo v. Tim Curry |
Plaintiff seeks an injunction against state of Texas to stop the enforcement of a law prohibiting the slaughter of horses in Texas as the law is improper on a number of bases. |
Pleading |