Results

Displaying 5851 - 5860 of 6637
Title Citation Alternate Citation Summary Type
Daniele v Weissenberger 2002 WL 31813949,136 A Crim R 390 2002 WASCA 346

Court uphold conviction for failure to provide food and water for horses. Even thought not the owner, he was the responsible party. Sentence of $3,000 fine and suspended 3 month was not excessive.

Case
Reid v. Kramer Not Reported in N.W. Rptr., 2019 WL 2866091 (Mich. Ct. App. July 2, 2019) In July of 2017, Alpena County Animal Control Officer Michelle Reid, filed a complaint against the respondents alleging that a black and tan German Shepherd named Bruiser had attacked or bit a person. The victim, Joshua Henderson, testified that as he was jogging past the respondents’ house, Bruiser ran toward him and bit his left bicep and left forearm. The Respondents stated that Bruiser had never attacked or bitten anyone before and was raised around children. The prosecutor clarified that euthanization was not being sought at the time, however, the district court found that Bruiser had caused serious injury to Henderson and noted the possibility of Bruiser injuring children in the future and ordered Bruiser to be destroyed. The Respondents appealed to the circuit court, which affirmed the district court’s decision. The Respondents then appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Respondents argued that the circuit court erred in determining that Bruiser was a dangerous animal and that the evidence did not support a finding that Bruiser caused death or serious injury or that he was likely to do so in the future. The Court of Appeals concluded that Bruiser fit the definition of a dangerous animal under the statute, however, the Court agreed with the Respondents that the evidence was insufficient to support a conclusion that Bruiser caused serious injury or was likely to cause death or serious injury in the future. In order for an animal to be destroyed, it must be more than dangerous. Henderson’s injuries consisted of scrapes, puncture wounds, and three stitches. Those injuries did not rise to the level of a “serious injury” as defined under MCL 287.321(e) which defines serious injury as permanent, serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious impairment of bodily function. The district court did not properly interpret MCL 287.322 and based their decision solely on the fact that Bruiser had bitten someone once and concluded that because of that, the court knew that Bruiser was more likely to do so again. The circuit court erred by affirming the district court’s order because the evidence did not support a finding that Bruiser had caused serious injury or death to a person or that he was likely to do so in the future. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded to the district court. Case
Incidente de apelación en autos G. B., R. s/inf. ley 14346 Causa Nº 17001-06-00/13 This is an appeal of a decision in first instance where the lower court gave the custody of 68 dogs to the Center for Prevention of Animal Cruelty. The 68 dogs were found in extremely poor conditions, sick, malnourished, dehydrated under the custody of the Defendant. Various dogs had dermatitis, conjunctivitis, otitis, sparse hair and boils, lacerations, pyoderma and ulcers. The officers that executed the search also found the decomposing body of a dead dog inside the premises. The lower court determined the defendant had mental disabilities, which did not allow her to comprehend the scope of her acts, for which she was not found guilty of animal cruelty. However, the court determined that she was not suited to care for the dogs. The Defendant appealed the decision arguing that the authorities were not entitled to seize the animals. Case
NV - Invasive - 503.597. Introduction or removal of aquatic life or wildlife N. R. S. 503.597 NV ST 503.597 This Nevada law is aimed at aquatic invasive and injurious species. It states that, except as provided, it is unlawful, except by the written consent and approval, for any person at any time to receive, bring, or remove from one stream or body of water in this State to any other, or from one portion of the State to any other, or to any other state, any aquatic life or wildlife, or any spawn, eggs or young of any of them. A person who knowingly or intentionally introduces or attempts to introduce an aquatic invasive species or injurious aquatic species into any waters of this State is guilty of a misdemeanor for a first offense, and a category E felony for subsequent offenses. Additionally, a person convicted must pay a civil penalty of at least $25,000 but not more than $250,000, which is deposited into the Wildlife Account in the State General Fund to fight aquatic invasive species. Statute
MD - Emergency - § 5-614. Veterinary aid, care or assistance MD Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, § 5-614 MD CTS & JUD PRO § 5-614 This Maryland law provides that certain individuals including veterinarians, licensed medical providers, first responders, volunteer fire fighters, and designated local government employees who are responding to a call in the community are not civilly liable for any act or omission in giving any veterinary aid, care, or assistance to an animal where the owner or custodian of the animal is not available to grant permission. Certain requirements must be met per subsection (b) for immunity from civil liability. Statute
VA - Ordinance - § 3.2-6587. Unlawful acts; penalties Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6587 VA ST § 3.2-6587 This Virginia statute describes the unlawful acts related to pets that will constitute Class 4 misdemeanors. Included are furnishing a false license application, failing to pay license tax, violating a leash or rabies ordinance, not disposing of dead companion animals per statute, and improperly concealing a pet. Also, a Class 1 misdemeanor may be imposed for falsely impersonating a humane officer or for falsifying a claim for animal damage. Statute
MI - Muskegon Heights - Breed - Pit Bull Ban MUSKEGON HEIGHTS, MI., CODE OF ORDINANCES §§ 14-1 - 14-9 (2006)

In Muskegon Heights, Michigan, it is prohibited to own, keep, or harbor any dangerous animal, including pit bull, with exceptions for exhibition, veterinary treatment, security, etc, Pit bulls must be properly confined or kept on a leash and muzzle. the owner must post a "Beware of Dog" sign and keep liability insurance of $50,000. Failure to comply is a misdemeanor.

Local Ordinance
Jenkins v. State 262 P.3d 552 (Wyo.,2011) 2011 WL 4825636 (Wyo.); 2011 WY 141

Defendant was convicted of misdemeanor animal cruelty. Defendant appealed, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The Supreme Court held that he was not entitled to a reversal, because he failed to demonstrate that his counsel failed to render reasonably competent assistance that prejudiced him to such an extent that he was deprived of a fair trial. The Court held that it was not ineffective assistance to 1) fail to object to testimony regarding defendant's arrest and incarceration, and 2) fail to object to defendant's brother testifying while wearing a striped prison suit.

Case
Scotland - Dogs, microchip - The Microchipping of Dogs (Scotland) Regulations 2016 2016 No. 58 Regulations providing for the compulsory microchipping of dogs and the recording of each dog’s identity and its keeper’s contact details on a database. Statute
SD - Trap - 41-8-28. Trap robbing or injury as misdemeanor S D C L § 41-8-28 SD ST § 41-8-28 This South Dakota law provides that any person who steals, damages or destroys a trap of another, or who steals, damages, or destroys animals, animal carcasses, or the pelts thereof, held fast by such traps, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Statute

Pages