Anti-Cruelty
Displaying 531 - 540 of 970
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| NE - Cruelty - Article 9. Livestock Animal Welfare Act | In 2010, Nebraska enacted the Livestock Animal Welfare Act. The act makes the intentional abandonment, neglect, or cruel mistreatment of livestock (bovine, equine, swine, sheep, goats, domesticated cervine animals, ratite birds, or poultry) a Class I misdemeanor (Class IV felony for subsequent offenses). Further, the act criminalizes "indecency with a livestock animal," which is a Class III misdemeanor. A person who is convicted of a Class IV felony under 54-903 (the abandonment/cruel neglect or mistreatment provision) shall also be ordered by the sentencing court not to possess a livestock animal for at least 5 years after the date of conviction. |
| NE - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Laws (Article 10) | This Nebraska statutory section comprises the state's anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. The cruelty provision provides that a person who abandons or cruelly neglects an animal is guilty of a Class I misdemeanor. Intentional animal cruelty results in a Class I misdemeanor for the first offense and a Class IV felony for any subsequent offense, unless such cruel mistreatment involves the knowing and intentional torture, repeated beating, or mutilation of the animal where such an act automatically results in a Class IV felony. Animal means any vertebrate member of the animal kingdom, but does not include an uncaptured wild creature (which appears to exclude otherwise heinous, intentional acts to wildlife). |
| Nebraska Complied Laws 1887: Chapter X: Offenses Related to Domestic Animals | Nebraska Compiled Statutes from 1887. The statutes cover cruelty to animals from transportation to negligence in handling. Also covered is the stealing or interfering with various types of domestic animals. |
| Neita v. City of Chicago | This case concerns a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from the warrantless seizure of a pit bull named Macy and the arrest of her owner, Vaughn Neita, for alleged violations of the Illinois Humane Care for Animals Act following an anonymous tip. The investigation was triggered by reports of a dog kept in inhumane conditions, specifically alleging the animal was tied up outside all day without shelter, food, or water in freezing weather. Upon arrival at the property, officers observed a fenced lot with parked vehicles where Macy was tethered to a truck bumper with two rope leashes, allowing her access to a custom-built plywood doghouse that contained an electric heater and bowls. The central animal law issue was whether the officers had probable cause to believe Neita violated the Act by failing to provide adequate shelter from the 19-degree Fahrenheit weather, sufficient unfrozen water, and by allegedly using a choke-type collar. The appellate court, reversing the grant of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, found genuine issues of material fact, noting Macy was a robust, muscular dog, her shelter was free of feces and lacked the snow accumulation present on other vehicles, and the officers' brief investigation failed to fully ascertain the adequacy of the heater or the type of collar. The court construed the Act's "adequate shelter" and "sufficient quantity" requirements through an objective, reasonable person lens but concluded the record did not support a finding of arguable probable cause as a matter of law, thereby reviving the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claims for the unlawful seizure of the animal and false arrest. A dissenting opinion contended that the law was not clearly established in a fact-specific manner and would have found the officers were entitled to qualified immunity based on the conditions observed, including the frozen water bowl and the dog's exposure to the elements. The appellate court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the case for further proceedings. |
| Never Enough: Animal Hoarding Law |
ABSTRACT Animal hoarding, a disorder that causes sufferers to acquire animals compulsively despite the inability or unwillingness to provide them with adequate care, is a widespread, costly, often underestimated problem that causes more animal suffering than all acts of intentional cruelty combined. Not only are animals harmed, but humans are as well, from dependents that live with hoarders to members of the surrounding communities to the hoarders themselves. Current laws do not address the issue effectively, and recidivism rates are close to 100%. This Article seeks to increase awareness of the animal hoarding problem and offers suggestions as to how the law might evolve to better manage and resolve these complex cases. |
| New Hampshire General Laws 1878: Trespasses, Malicious Acts, etc. | The New Hampshire session laws from 1878, chapter 281, covers the state's cruelty to animals laws. Specifically, the law covers cruelty to animals and the treatment of animals during transportation. |
| New Hampshire Revised Statutes 1843: Offences Against Chastity, Decency and Morality | Section 12 of Chapter 219 from New Hampshire Revised Statutes of 1843 covers cruelty to animals. Specifically, the statutes states what qualifies as cruelty to animals and the punishment for it. |
| New Jersey Revision of Statutes 1709-1877: Chapter XII Supplement: An act for the prevention of cruelty to animals. | A supplement to the New Jersey Revision of Statutes for 1877. The supplement covered standing for officer's of New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. In addition, the supplement addresses the question of jurisdiction for the enforcement the anti-cruelty laws. |
| New Jersey Revision of Statutes 1709-1877: Chapter XII: An act for the prevention of cruelty to animals. | A compilation of the New Jersey anti-cruelty laws as of 1877. The laws covered include treatment of animals, penalties, and exceptions for scientific experiments. |
| New Jersey Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Board of Education |
|