Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quick Index of Pleadings Topics | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This alphabetical topical index provides links to the summaries of various pleadings. You may then click on the case name, which will bring you to a summary and listing of the available pleading documents for that specific case. |
| Detailed Discussion of State Dog Impound Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This paper explores state and municipal dog impound laws, focusing specifically on loose dog laws, dogs chasing livestock laws, and public health laws. In doing so, the paper examines grants of police power to seize and destroy dog and what due process requirements constrain these state actions. |
| Pet Sale Cases | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This outline provides links to the cases that relate to the sale of companion animals. While not an exhaustive list, it does provide a sampling of the case law in the area. |
| Overview of States that Prohibit BSL | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This document lists the states that prohibit the regulation of dogs by local governments based on breed, commonly known as breed-specific legislation. The laws are divided into two general categories: (1) states that prohibit breed-specific legislation (BSL) in all animal regulation (10 states); and (2) states that prohibit BSL in dangerous/vicious dog laws (16 states). In total, there are approximately 22 states with some sort of anti-BSL legislation (combining both (1) and (2) together, and not counting DE, IL, and VA twice because they have both such laws). The pertinent part of the legislation is included in this list as well as a link to the actual laws. A further distinction has to be made in the application of some of these laws in the dangerous dog category. Some laws state that municipalities may not regulate dangerous dogs based solely on breed while other laws simply say that breed cannot be used to prove a dangerous dog declaration. |
| Detailed Discussion of Montana Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Great Apes law in Montana. Mississippi law directly regulates Great Apes by a law that bans the importation and possession of certain wild animals deemed "inherently dangerous." In addition, the state also addresses Great Apes in its general anti-cruelty law as well as its endangered species provisions. While the state of Montana controls possession and importation of “exotic wildlife” by law, great apes are not specifically identified or addressed. Instead, Montana regulates the possession of great apes by administrative regulation and reference to the federal endangered species list. In the regulations, great apes are specifically defined as a "prohibited species " meaning they “may not be possessed, sold, purchased, exchanged, or transported in Montana, except as provided. . .”. In addition, Montana law addresses the commercial use of great apes in what it terms, “roadside menageries,” where animals are kept in captivity for the purpose of exhibition or attracting trade. Like other states, Montana does not define Great Apes as "endangered," either under its own endangered species law or accompanying regulation. It does, however, cover them by reference to federal law. Finally, great apes are covered under the state’s anti-cruelty law. However, the law contains a number of exempt categories including scientific research and teaching. |
| Overview of Pet Number Restrictions in Municipal Ordinances | Rebecca F. Wisch | Michigan State University College of Law |
This legal discussion overviews the typical elements in municipal ordinances that restrict the number of pets a person can own. It analyzes the relevant cases and provides examples ordinances that limit the number of dogs a person can own. Both nuisance regulations and zoning regulations are discussed, as well as the broad police powers municipalities enjoy. |
| FAQs on Emotional Support Animals | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | On September 17, 2025, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) formally withdrew two key guidance documents that housing providers relied upon to evaluate requests for service and assistance animals. These documents were FHEO Notice 2013-01 ("Service Animals and Assistance Animals for People with Disabilities in Housing") and FHEO Notice 2020-01 ("Assessing a Person's Request to Have an Animal as a Reasonable Accommodation Under the Fair Housing Act"). According to HUD's memorandum, the withdrawal was part of a deregulatory initiative aimed at reducing compliance burdens and ensuring that guidance does not exceed what federal statutes actually require. The agency stated that the withdrawn guidance "should not be enforced or otherwise relied upon by the Department or stakeholders" and has removed these documents from the HUD.gov website. This Q and A part of this document are for historical purposes only and do not reflect current federal interpretation of federal law. |
| Overview of Companion Animal Sales | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This overview provides the answer to the question of what a purchaser of an ill dog or defective dog can do. Included is a summary of contract law affecting pet sales, the relevant provisions under the UCC's sale of goods, and state pet purchaser protection laws. |
| Detailed Discussion of Virginia Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This discussion analyzes the laws relevant to the possession of great apes in Virginia. The paper examines categories of individuals who possess great apes including persons using them as pets, exhibitors, zoos, sanctuaries, and research facilities. |
| Detailed Discussion of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Law Legal and Historical Center |
This article explores the history and text of the BGEPA. It further examines the relevant legal issues spawned by the Act, including free exercise challenges by Native Americans, the abrogation of treaty rights, commerce in eagle parts, and requisite intent for criminal prosecution under the Act. |