Connecticut

Displaying 51 - 60 of 78
Titlesort ascending Summary
CT - Equine Activity Liability Statute - Chapter 925. Statutory Rights of Action and Defenses


This unusually short Connecticut statute limits the liability of equine sponsors by providing that each person engaged in recreational equestrian activities assumes the risk for any injury arising out of the hazards inherent in equestrian sports.  However, if the the injury was proximately caused by the negligence of the person providing the horse or by the failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity, liability if not limited by law.

CT - Endangered Species - CHAPTER 495. ENDANGERED SPECIES


These statutes provide Connecticut's endangered species provisions.  Included are the findings and policy, definitions, acquisition and management of habitat, and penalties for taking of listed species.  The statute also has a provision specific to elephant ivory.

CT - Domestic Violence - § 46b-15. Relief from physical abuse by family


Under this Connecticut law, any family or household member who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family may apply to the Superior Court for an order of protection . The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.

CT - Dog - Consolidated Dog Laws


These Connecticut statutes comprise the state's dog law.  Among the provisions include licensing, kennel, and rabies regulations.  With regard to damage by dogs, the law provides a form of strict liability that states if any dog does any damage to either the body or property of any person, the owner or keeper shall be liable for such damage, except when such damage has been occasioned to the body or property of a person who, at the time such damage was sustained, was committing a trespass or other tort, or was teasing, tormenting or abusing such dog.  The law also contains a unique "dogs on highway" provision that provides that any person owning or having the custody of any dog which habitually goes out on any highway and growls, bites, or snaps at, or otherwise annoys, any person or domestic animal lawfully using such highway or chases or interferes with any motor vehicle so using such highway, shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor.  Further, among the nuisance provisions, the law states that no person shall own or harbor a dog which is a nuisance by reason of vicious disposition or excessive barking or other disturbance. These laws also contain provisions on reporting neglected or cruelly treated animals.  Finally, Connecticut has an anti-ear cropping measures that prohibits cropping by anyone who is not a registered veterinary surgeon, and who performs the operation when the dog is under an anesthetic.

CT - Disaster - Evacuation of Animals During Disasters - Chapter 517.


In Connecticut, “civil preparedness” includes activities designed to minimize the effects upon the civilian population in the event of major disaster or emergency. Such measures include the nonmilitary evacuation of the civilian population, pets and service animals.

CT - Cruelty, reporting - § 17a-100a. Reporting of neglected or cruelly treated animals.

These Connecticut statutes require state employees who work with children and families to also report suspected animal harm, neglect, or cruelty. The statutes explain how the reporting should be completed and describes the implementation of training programs for employees to recognize animal abuse. The statutes also discuss the development of an annual report on acutal or suspected instances of animal neglect or cruelty within the state.  

CT - Cruelty - § 54-86n. Appointment of advocate in proceeding re the welfare or custody of a cat or dog. This 2016 law states that, in a cruelty or welfare proceedings, the court may order, upon its own initiative or upon request of a party or counsel for a party, that a separate advocate be appointed to represent the interests of justice. That advocate can monitor the case and supply the court with information about the welfare of the cat or dog. The Department of Agriculture shall maintain a list of attorneys with knowledge of animal issues and the legal system and a list of law schools that have students, or anticipate having students, with an interest in animal issues and the legal system. Such attorneys and law students shall be eligible to serve on a voluntary basis as advocates under this section.
CT - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Laws


This Connecticut section contains the state's anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions.  Any person who overdrives, drives when overloaded, overworks, tortures, deprives of necessary sustenance, mutilates or cruelly beats or kills or unjustifiably injures


any animal


, or fails to give an animal in his or her custody proper care, among other things shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year or both; a subsequent offense is a Class D felony.  Any person who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures, wounds or kills an animal is also guilty of a Class D felony. Animal fighting is also prohibited under this section as a Class D felony.  Connecticut has a cruelty to poultry law that provides that any crate or other container used for the purpose of transporting, shipping or holding for sale any live poultry must be in a sanitary condition with sufficient ventilation and warmth to prevent unnecessary suffering.  Other provisions include laws against dyeing chicks and rabbits, docking horses' tails, and the use of animals, birds, or reptiles to solicit money.

CT - Assistance Animals - Connecticut Assistance Animal/Guide Dog Laws


The following statutes comprise the state's relevant assistance animal and guide dog laws.

Connecticut v. Devon D. Devon D. was convicted of four counts sexual assault and three counts of risk of injury to a child upon allegations made by three of Devon D.’s biological children, C1, C2, and C3. He appealed his conviction on the grounds that the trial court had abused its discretion by having the three cases to be tried jointly and by permitting C1 to testify with a dog at her feet. The appellate court had accepted these arguments and reversed and remanded for a new trial, but the Supreme Court of Connecticut reversed the appellate court. The Connecticut Supreme Court concluded that “the trial court properly exercised its discretion in permitting the cases to be tried together because the evidence in all three cases was cross admissible,” and reversed on that issue. As to the appellate court’s determination that the trial court had abused its discretion in permitting a dog to sit near C1 during her testimony to provide comfort and support,” the Supreme Court also reversed, reinstating the verdict and judgment of the trial court.

Pages