 New! Maine legislature passes law to prohibit the cruel confinement of veal calves and sows during gestation. LB 1021 goes into effect in 2011.
New! Certiorari granted by U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. v. Stevens - the case that invalidated the federal law prohibiting depictions of animal cruelty. Click here to read many of the the pleadings filed.
New! Vermont Supreme Court aligns itself with majority of jurisdictions in holding that a plaintiff cannot recover noneconomic damages for the loss of a pet. Click here to read the case.
 The Ringling Brothers Circus trial (ASPCA et al. v. Feld Entertainment Inc.) decision now rests with the judge. To read the full collection of pleadings in the case, click here.
 The European Union (EU) parliament voted in early May to ban the importation of seal products into the 27 nations comprising the union. To read more about the Canada seal hunt, see The Canadian Commercial Seal Hunt: In Search of International Legal Protection for Harp Seals, by Cynthia Hodges, J.D., LL.M., M.A (2008).
 Evolving Functions of Service and Therapy Animals and the Implications for Public Accommodation Access Rules, by John Ensminger and Frances Breitkopf (2008).
See the Map Page for the following maps:
Topics Added in 2008:
International Materials:
Interesting Links:
Virginia creates Web-based dangerous dog registry. The Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services (VDACS) launched an interactive dangerous dog registry that enables people to check if dangerous dogs reside in their area. Legislation enacted in 2006 mandated the creation of this online registry. So far, VA is the only state with an on-line version. Click here to see it in action.
Recently Added Articles:
Book Review: An American Trilogy: Death, Slavery, and Dominion on the Banks of the Cape Fear River by Steven M. Wise - Reviewed by Henry Cohen.
Avoiding a Triple Frown: The Need for a National Horse Racing Commission, Anthony Russolello, Animal Legal & Historical Center (2009).
Why is it a Crime to Stomp a Goldfish?--Harm, Victimhood and the Structure of Anti-Cruelty Offenses, Luis E. Chiesa, 78 Miss. L.J. 1 (Fall 2008).
Anti-Horse Slaughter Legislation: Bad for Horses, Bad for Society, Laura Jane Durfee, 84 Ind. L.J. 353 (Winter, 2009).
Justice for Dusty: Implementing Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Animal Abusers, Kirsten E. Brimer, 113 Penn St. L. Rev. 649 (Fall 2008).
Don't Feed the Animals: Queso's Law and How the Texas Legislature Abandoned Stray Animals, A Comment on H.B. 2328 and the New Tex. Penal Code § 42.092, Jeremy Masten, 60 Baylor L. Rev. 964 (Fall 2008).
Legal Aspects of Animal Sacrifice within the Context of Afro-Caribbean Religions, Jose A. Lammoglia, 20 St. Thomas L. Rev. 710-720 (2008)
Rescue Me: Legislating Cooperation Between Animal Control Authorities and Rescue Organizations, Rebecca J. Huss, 39 Conn. L. Rev. 2059 (2007).
Pit Bull Bans and the Human Factors Affecting Canine Behavior, Jamey Medlin, 56 DePaul L. Rev. 1285 (2007).
Recently Added Cases - Jessica Salomon, Case Editor:
Maldonado v. Fontanes, --- F.3d ----, 2009 WL 1547737 (C.A.1 (Puerto Rico)). At issue is the interlocutory appeal of the Mayor of Barceloneta, Puerto Rico based on the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity. During raids at public housing complexes, plaintiffs' pets were seized and then killed by either being slammed against the side of a van or thrown off a 50-foot bridge. The court rejected the Mayor's contention that he is entitled to immunity because the substantive due process “shock the conscience” caselaw does not apply in situations of deprivation of property (here, pets). The court stated: "We see no reason to read the word “property” out of the Amendment. . .” Ultimately, the court determined the alleged liability of the Mayor for substantive due process violations did not involve a policy of the Municipality for which the Mayor was responsible, nor involved his personal conduct.
Utah Animal Rights Coalition v. Salt Lake County, 566 F.3d 1236 (C.A.10 (Utah),2009). The plaintiffs filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for alleged violations of their First Amendment rights to free speech and to peaceably assemble after the individual plaintiffs attempted to protest a circus in South Jordan, Utah. The district court entered summary judgment against the plaintiffs. On appeal, this court held that, without a showing of harm, the UARC did not meet its burden to demonstrate an injury in fact. With regard to the § 1983 action, this court ruled that the district court correctly determined that county officials were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Humane Soc. of U.S., Inc. v. Brennan, --- N.Y.S.2d ----, 2009 WL 1687735 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.). In this New York case, the petitioners, various organizations and individuals generally opposed to the production of foie gras submitted a petition to respondent Department of Agriculture and Markets seeking a declaration that foie gras is an adulterated food product by law. The respondent Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets refused to issue a statement to the requested declaration. This court held that petitioners lacked standing because they did not suffer an injury within the zone of interests protected by State Administrative Procedure Act §§ 204.
| 
