United States

Viva! v. Adidas

Summary: <span> Viva, an animal protective organization, filed action against Adidas shoe retailer alleging that it was violating a state statute banning the import of products made from Australian kangaroo hide&nbsp;into California. On cross motions for summary judgment, the original court sided with Adidas, <span> on the ground that state statute was preempted by federal Endangered Species Act of 1973.&nbsp; The appeals court affirmed, however the California Superior Court reversed, holding that the state statute was not preempted by federal law.&nbsp; </span> </span>

Viva, an animal protective organization, filed action against Adidas shoe retailer alleging that it was violating a state statute banning the import of products made from Australian kangaroo hide into California. On cross motions for summary judgment, the original court sided with Adidas, on the ground that state statute was preempted by federal Endangered Species Act of 1973.  The appeals court affirmed, however the California Superior Court reversed, holding that the state statute was not preempted by federal law. 

California Veterinary Medical Ass'n v. City of West Hollywood

Summary: <p> This California case centers on an anti-cat declawing ordinance passed by the city of West Hollywood in 2003.&nbsp; On cross-motions for summary judgment the trial court concluded West Hollywood's anti-declawing ordinance was preempted by section 460 and entered judgment in favor of the CVMA, declaring the ordinance invalid and enjoining further enforcement.&nbsp; On appeal, however, this Court reversed, finding section 460 of the veterinary code does not preempt the ordinance.&nbsp; Although section 460 prohibits local legislation imposing separate and additional licensing requirements or other qualifications on individuals holding state licenses issued by agencies of the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), it does not preclude otherwise valid local regulation of the manner in which a business or profession is performed. </p>

This California case centers on an anti-cat declawing ordinance passed by the city of West Hollywood in 2003.  On cross-motions for summary judgment the trial court concluded West Hollywood's anti-declawing ordinance was preempted by section 460 and entered judgment in favor of the CVMA, declaring the ordinance invalid and enjoining further enforcement.  On appeal, however, this Court reversed, finding section 460 of the veterinary code does not preempt the ordinance.  Although section 460 prohibits local legislation imposing separate and additional licensing requirements or other qualifications on individuals holding state licenses issued by agencies of the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), it does not preclude otherwise valid local regulation of the manner in which a business or profession is performed.

Humane Society of United States v. State Board of Equalization

Summary: <p> Humane society and four state taxpayers brought action attacking government waste, requesting injunctive and declaratory relief that would bar implementation of tax exemptions for farm equipment and machinery as they applied to &ldquo;battery cage&rdquo; chicken coops that allegedly violated animal cruelty laws. State Board of Equalization demurred. Superior Court sustained without leave to amend the complaint&nbsp;and dismissed the case, which the Court of Appeal affirmed, stating that the plaintiffs did not allege a valid cause of action attacking government waste. </p>

Humane society and four state taxpayers brought action attacking government waste, requesting injunctive and declaratory relief that would bar implementation of tax exemptions for farm equipment and machinery as they applied to “battery cage” chicken coops that allegedly violated animal cruelty laws. State Board of Equalization demurred. Superior Court sustained without leave to amend the complaint and dismissed the case, which the Court of Appeal affirmed, stating that the plaintiffs did not allege a valid cause of action attacking government waste.

People v. Flores

Summary: <p> Defendants&nbsp;were tried for allegedly invading an eighty-year-old woman's home and stealing, at gun point,&nbsp;and holding ransom eight seven-week-old puppies and two adult female Yorkshire terriers which she bred for the American Kennel Club for about $3,000 each.&nbsp; The jury held the defendants responsible for 18 counts of various crimes, including robbery, grand theft dog, elder abuse, conspiracy and cruelty to animals, inter alia.&nbsp; The appellate court&nbsp;reversed the counts of grand theft dog which were improperly based on the same conduct as the robbery conviction, reduced the sentence on the&nbsp;counts for abuse of&nbsp;an elder,&nbsp;and otherwise&nbsp;found no&nbsp;additional errors.&nbsp; </p>

Defendants were tried for allegedly invading an eighty-year-old woman's home and stealing, at gun point, and holding ransom eight seven-week-old puppies and two adult female Yorkshire terriers which she bred for the American Kennel Club for about $3,000 each.  The jury held the defendants responsible for 18 counts of various crimes, including robbery, grand theft dog, elder abuse, conspiracy and cruelty to animals, inter alia.  The appellate court reversed the counts of grand theft dog which were improperly based on the same conduct as the robbery conviction, reduced the sentence on the counts for abuse of an elder, and otherwise found no additional errors. 

Chee v. Amanda Goldt Property Management

Summary: <span> Plaintiff, Lila Chee, a resident and owner of a condominium unit, appealed from a judgment entered in favor of all defendants on her complaint seeking damages for personal injuries she suffered when a dog belonging to Olga Kiymaz, a tenant of another unit in the same complex, jumped on Chee. In affirming the lower court's award of summary judgment, this court held that the&nbsp;landlord had no duty in absence of landlord's actual knowledge of dog's dangerous propensities. Further, the landlord was not liable to owner for nuisance.&nbsp;Finally, the condominium covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&amp;R's) did not impose vicarious liability on landlord. </span>

Plaintiff, Lila Chee, a resident and owner of a condominium unit, appealed from a judgment entered in favor of all defendants on her complaint seeking damages for personal injuries she suffered when a dog belonging to Olga Kiymaz, a tenant of another unit in the same complex, jumped on Chee. In affirming the lower court's award of summary judgment, this court held that the landlord had no duty in absence of landlord's actual knowledge of dog's dangerous propensities. Further, the landlord was not liable to owner for nuisance. Finally, the condominium covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) did not impose vicarious liability on landlord.

Pulaski v. Chrisman

Summary: <p> Residents of a mobile home park attempted to get injunction preventing the conversion of their mobile home park into a community campground.&nbsp; Plaintiffs claimed violation of the Endangered Species Act due to the possible removal of endangered species during the renovation.&nbsp; The court held it did not have jurisdiction to entertain part of plaintiffs Endangered Species&nbsp;claim because of a procedural violation&nbsp;and that plaintiffs failed to show violation of the Endangered Species Act was likely on the remainder of their claims.&nbsp; </p>

Residents of a mobile home park attempted to get injunction preventing the conversion of their mobile home park into a community campground.  Plaintiffs claimed violation of the Endangered Species Act due to the possible removal of endangered species during the renovation.  The court held it did not have jurisdiction to entertain part of plaintiffs Endangered Species claim because of a procedural violation and that plaintiffs failed to show violation of the Endangered Species Act was likely on the remainder of their claims. 

People v. Alvarado

Summary: <p> A man stabbed and killed his two dogs while drunk.&nbsp; His girlfriend called the police after being informed of the situation by her brother.&nbsp; The trial court convicted the man of violating an anti-cruelty statute (Sec. 597 of the Penal Code).&nbsp; The Court of Appeals affirmed defendant's conviction, finding that&nbsp;Sec. 597 is a general intent crime and did not require a showing of specific intent to kill or harm the dog. </p>

A man stabbed and killed his two dogs while drunk.  His girlfriend called the police after being informed of the situation by her brother.  The trial court convicted the man of violating an anti-cruelty statute (Sec. 597 of the Penal Code).  The Court of Appeals affirmed defendant's conviction, finding that Sec. 597 is a general intent crime and did not require a showing of specific intent to kill or harm the dog.

People v. Schneider

Summary: <p> Defendant's dogs escaped from Defendant's yard and attacked and killed a six-year-old boy.&nbsp; The trial court convicted&nbsp;Defendant of owning a mischievous animal that causes death and involuntary manslaughter.&nbsp; The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the trial court's conviction for owning a mischievous animal that causes death due to erroneous jury instructions.&nbsp; </p>

Defendant's dogs escaped from Defendant's yard and attacked and killed a six-year-old boy.  The trial court convicted Defendant of owning a mischievous animal that causes death and involuntary manslaughter.  The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the trial court's conviction for owning a mischievous animal that causes death due to erroneous jury instructions. 

Auburn Woods I Homeowners Ass'n v. Fair Employment and Housing Com'n

Summary: <p> In this California case, the Elebiaris sought permission from their condominium association to keep a small dog as a companion (both <span> suffered from severe depression and found that taking care of a dog alleviated their symptoms and enabled them to function more productively).&nbsp; T <span> he association refused their request, leading the Elebiaris to file a claim with the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (the FEHC), which found in favor of the Elebiaris.&nbsp; After the Superior Court granted the condominium's petition, the FEHC and residents appealed. </span> &nbsp; The appellate court&nbsp;held that the trial court erred in overturning the FEHC decision where the FEHC's finding that a companion dog constituted a reasonable accommodation for plaintiff's disability was supported by substantial evidence. </span> </p>

In this California case, the Elebiaris sought permission from their condominium association to keep a small dog as a companion (both suffered from severe depression and found that taking care of a dog alleviated their symptoms and enabled them to function more productively).  T he association refused their request, leading the Elebiaris to file a claim with the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (the FEHC), which found in favor of the Elebiaris.  After the Superior Court granted the condominium's petition, the FEHC and residents appealed.   The appellate court held that the trial court erred in overturning the FEHC decision where the FEHC's finding that a companion dog constituted a reasonable accommodation for plaintiff's disability was supported by substantial evidence.

Wright v. Fish and Game Commission (unpublished)

Summary: <p> The California Court of Appeal upheld the state's Fish and Game Commission&rsquo;s ferret ban against an equal protection challenge from a ferret owner. The owner argued that the ban discriminated between ferret owners and owners of other companion animals. However, the court found a rational relation between the ban and concerns about wildlife and human health (from attacks and from rabies). </p>

The California Court of Appeal upheld the state's Fish and Game Commission’s ferret ban against an equal protection challenge from a ferret owner. The owner argued that the ban discriminated between ferret owners and owners of other companion animals. However, the court found a rational relation between the ban and concerns about wildlife and human health (from attacks and from rabies).