STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
|
|
- Harvey Chapman
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION SUNSET GROVE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner, v. Case No JANET FINNEY, Respondent. / FINAL ORDER Comes now, the undersigned arbitrator, and enters this final order as follows: The petitioner/association filed its petition on September 2, 1998, seeking removal of a Rottweiler dog owned by Janet Finney, the respondent/unit owner. The case proceeded to final hearing by telephone conference call, which was conducted on December 7, 1998, at which both parties presented testimony and argument. Documentary evidence previously furnished was moved into evidence. The unit owner filed a memorandum of law on December 22, Pursuant to the association s motion, the case was abated for settlement on December 23, The arbitrator s order provided that, if the case had not been settled by December 30, the association was to file its memorandum of law on that date. The association filed its memorandum on December 30. On January 6, 1999, the association filed a notice that settlement negotiations had failed. This order is based upon the complete record in the case. It is undisputed that the dog in question has bitten two individuals on the condominium property. The first individual was Fred, a roofer working for a contractor, and the incident occurred 1
2 on August 26, The second incident involved a 14-year old boy, a resident of the condominium named Ben, in an incident on July 10, On both occasions, the dog was quarantined for approximately 10 days following the bites, by Pinellas County Animal Services. As a basis for seeking removal of the dog, the association asserts that the animal is a nuisance. It seeks to invoke article X of the declaration of condominium, which recites in pertinent part as follows: X USE RESTRICTIONS The use of the property of the condominium shall be in accordance with the following provisions: A. Nuisances No nuisance shall be allowed upon the condominium property nor any use or practice which is the source of annoyance to residents or which interferes with the peaceful possession and proper use of the property by its residents. In Valencia Village Condo. Assn., Inc. v. Aloof, Arb. Case No , Order Granting Motion for Emergency Temporary Injunctive Relief (July 5, 1996) and Final Order (August 9, 1996), a 110-pound Rottweiller which had bitten a child and was prone to bite when excited, was ordered removed from the condominium property because it was found to be in violation of a declaration provision prohibiting pets which cause or create a nuisance. In Outdoor Resorts at Long Key, Inc. v. Kelly, et al., Arb. Case No , Final Order, May 22, 1997, two Dalmatians were ordered removed after two incidents in which the dogs attacked or bit other dogs. While the dogs showed no propensity to injure persons, it was possible that persons attempting to save their dogs would be injured. The arbitrator held that other owners have the right to walk their pets on the common elements without fear of molestation or predation. The arbitrator, in discussing the possibility that a person might be injured, stated: An association has the duty of maintaining the condominium property in a safe manner, and may face liability where a dog known to bite is permitted to remain on the property. Barrwood Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Maser, 675 So. 2d 983 2
3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) 1. Although the dogs in this case cannot be characterized as vicious, enough parallel exists between these facts and the facts presented in the Barrwood case to warrant a legitimate association concern for its potential liability and for the safety of its residents. The arbitrator in the Outdoor Resorts case held that the Dalmatians constituted a nuisance to the surrounding community warranting their removal. In the present case, the other unit owners and their families, who include many elderly people as well as numerous young children, have a right to go about the condominium property without fear of Ms. Finney s dog. To the extent that the dog s presence constitutes a sufficient injury to the legal rights of her neighbors to amount to a nuisance violative of the declaration, there is sufficient evidence to warrant removal of the dog. Ms. Finney argues that a nuisance is a continuing offensive activity, and that the two incidents with her dog, which has been on the property for seven years, were isolated incidents a year apart, the last of which was more than five months ago, and should not be considered a nuisance. The dog owners in the Outdoor Resorts case made a similar argument, which the arbitrator addressed as follows: The arbitrator does not agree with respondents that more incidents shoul d be required in the pet nuisance area because the premise underlying the argument-- that a few bites over a few years is insufficient--is repugnant to sound reasoning and is productive of an odious result. Maintaining a dog which may bite another or injure an intervening child or adult differs substantively from playing a stereo too loudly once a year. In the case of the former, the harm risked is much greater and deserving of a different analysis than the latter which may place at jeopardy an eve's good sleep once a year. Missing a night's sleep once a year is a function of community living whereas experiencing a bite a year is not; a dog barking and disturbing sleep once over the course of the year is not rationally likened to an only occasional bite which may threaten the life or safety of other lawful pets or persons. Outdoor Resorts at Long Key, Inc. v. Kelly, et al. Arb. Case No , Order on Motion for Rehearing (June 13, 1997). Accordingly, the argument in the present case that the dog only occasionally bites, and is not 1 In Barrwood, a dog attacked and bit a minor on the common area, property owned and controlled by the homeowner s association. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to allow a jury to determine whether the association was aware of the dog s vicious propensities, in determining the percentage of fault in 3
4 therefore a nuisance, is rejected. Ms. Finney further disputes the wording in the petition that her dog viciously attacked two individuals. She testified that, in both incidents, the dog nipped, the individuals involved. Her testimony also reflected, however, that both individuals required medical treatment and that she offered to pay the bills in both incidents. She argues that in both incidents, the dog was provoked. Ms. Finney testified regarding the first incident that she was walking her dog on a leash and attempted to warn off Fred, the roofing company employee, but that Fred nevertheless approached the Rottweiler and began to playfully bob its head back and forth in his hands, whereupon the dog, who was also playing, became excited and nipped Fred. In the second incident, she testified that she was exiting her fenced-in courtyard at the front of her unit while juggling an umbrella and the dog on a leash and did not see the actual bite. She presented the testimony of Lacey Westover, a nine-yearold girl who is Ms. Finney s next-door neighbor, who did not witness the incident, but testified that Ben and Jessica, a girl who was present, had told her that Ben punched the dog. An adult resident who did not witness the incident, Candy Buck, testified that Jessica told her that Ben struck the dog s head. The association presented the condominium vice president, Lee Harsha, who testified that he did not witness the incident, but that Ben told him that he stepped between the dog and Jessica, because the dog was going after Jessica, and that Ben was then bitten. Ben said that he hit the dog to get released. Both of these versions are hearsay, which are insufficient to independently support a finding of fact in these hearings. Rule 61B (5)(a), Florida Administrative Code. The competent evidence does not establish that the dog was provoked in either incident. Ms. Finney testified that she weighs 110 pounds and the Rottweiler weighs 98 pounds. She has two other dogs, both dachshunds, and she walks all three dogs together on the common elements. She also testified that neighborhood children come to her unit to play with the Rottweiler. The evidence as a whole a negligence action. 4
5 reflects that the dog may bite while playing and that Ms. Finney is not always able to control the Rottweiler and the situation sufficiently to prevent persons from approaching it. Ms. Finney s argument that the Rottweiler s actions should be excused due to provocation, is rejected by the arbitrator. Ms. Finney further points out that her Rottweiler has co mpleted obedience school and has not been classified as dangerous by the Pinellas County Department of Animal Services. These considerations, however, are not controlling as to whether the dog is a nuisance. A classification of dangerous is not necessary for the dog to amount to a nuisance. See, Outdoor Resorts, above, in which a dog which had not bitten any person was held to constitute a nuisance. Certainly the dog in the present case, which has bitten two individuals, would constitute a nuisance. Additionally, Ms. Finney s contention that the dog has not been classified as dangerous, which is a reference to a July 30, 1998, letter from the Department of Animal Services, an exhibit she presented, overlooks the continuing language in that letter, which recites in pertinent part: However, while circumstances do not cause your pet to fall into the dangerous category at this time, IT IS DEMONSTRATING SIGNS OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR THAT MAY CAUSE IT TO BE CLASSIFIED DANGEROUS IN THE FUTURE AND AN OPEN FILE WILL BE KEPT ON THE INVESTIGATION. You must make every effort to control your dog and be advised the file will remain open. (Emphasis as in original.) Certainly, a determination that the dog can be aggressive would militate in favor of its being considered a nuisance. Accordingly, Ms. Finney s argument that the dog is not a nuisance on the basis of the Department of Animal Services finding is rejected by the arbitrator. Ms. Finney further asserts that her Rottweiler should not be considered a nuisance because numerous small children in the condominium have played with him on a daily basis for many years. The arbitrator takes notice that several witnesses presented by Ms. Finney testified regarding the gentle nature of the dog. Such evidence, at first glance, might indicate that the dog should not be 5
6 considered a nuisance. Further consideration, however, indicates that the dog is capable of being unpredictable. Accordingly, it is held that the evidence that neighborhood children play with the dog is insufficient to establish that the dog is not a nuisance. Finally, Ms. Finney points out that the arbitrator may grant other just and equitable remedy under Rule 61B (5), Florida Administrative Code. She prays that the arbitrator, in the event that the dog is considered a nuisance, order that the dog be muzzled when he is outside the locked courtyard or unit, safeguards which she testified at the hearing she had already implemented. The arbitrator notes that, at the hearing, he notified the parties that the relief requested in the pet ition was that the dog be removed, and that whether the dog would go or stay was the question that the arbitrator was going to decide. The arbitrator indicated to the parties that other measures that they could agree to had not been pled, and would be appropriate for settlement discussions. The parties indicated that they would immediately commence such discussions. As noted above, no settlement has been reached in this case. The pleadings and evidence did not indicate that the association was willing to accept any measure short of the dog s removal. It is further noted that no evidence was presented of any rule regarding muzzles, nor was it established that the association has the means to monitor or enforce such a requirement, if such were instituted for the particular dog in question. Indeed, Mary Farri, the association president, testified that muzzling would not be sat isfactory to the association. In the Valencia Village case, above, the arbitrator noted that the dog owner had taken some steps to control the risk presented by her dog, including placing a muzzle on the dog, walking him on a training leash, and confining him to an upstairs bedroom when she was absent from her unit. The arbitrator nevertheless ordered removal of the dog, noting: However, there is no level of assurance that the dog will not escape from the house when its residents are coming and going; there is no assurance that the dog will not, purposefully or in error, be permitted to roam about the house when respondent is not at home; there is no assurance that the dog will not become agitated again by children or other pets (or men, which respondent explained the dog does not trust) when being 6
7 walked about the common elements. It is natural for children to want to play with large dogs, and Ms. Aloof testified that perhaps as many as 35 children live in the area. Valencia Village, Order Granting Motion for Emergency Temporary Injunctive Relief. In the present case, the appropriate remedy is that the dog be removed from the condominium property so that there will not be a risk that he will again bite. Based upon the foregoing, it is ORDERED: 1. Within 20 days from the date of this order, Ms. Finney shall permanently remove her Rottweiler from the condominium property and shall not permit the dog to enter the condominium property again. Florida. 2. In the future, Ms. Finney shall comply with article X of the declaration. DONE AND ORDERED this 8th day of January, 1999, at Tallahassee, Leon County, Tyler Powell, Arbitrator Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida RIGHT TO TRIAL DE NOVO In accordance wit h Section , Florida Statutes, a part y adversely affected by this final order may appeal from the order by filing, within 30 days of entry of the order, a complaint for a trial de novo with a court of competent jurisdiction within the circuit in which the condominium is located. This order does not constitute final agency action and is not appealable to the distri ct courts of appeal. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was faxed and mailed by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, this 8th day of January, 1999, to: 7
8 Steven H. Mezer, Esq. Steven H. Mezer, P.A Court St., Ste. B Clearwater, FL Attorney for petitioner David C. Levenreich, Esq. 406 S. Prospect Ave. Clearwater, FL Attorney for respondent Tyler Powell, Arbitrator 8
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION CAMELOT TWO CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION The Fairways at Emerald Greens Condominium
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION RIVIERA CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS, INC.,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION STONE S THROW CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION WIMBLEDON AT JACARANDA CONDOMINIUM NO.1,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION RIVCO AT RINGLING CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION SOUTH BAY CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION SUNRISE LANDING CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION Royal Stewart Arms Condominium No. 5, Inc.,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION The Claridge Condominium Association,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION Lakeside Condominium Association No. 3,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES FINAL ORDER
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION Scottsdale Cluster Condominium III Association,
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION OCEAN RIVIERA ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner,
More informationRESOLUTION: BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED That the City of Shelton adopt the Vicious Dogs "Gracie's Law" Ordinance as follows following Ordinance:
PROPOSED VICIOUS DOG ORDINANCE: RESOLUTION: BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED That the City of Shelton adopt the Vicious Dogs "Gracie's Law" Ordinance as follows following Ordinance: A. Definitions: Animal Control
More informationSUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO.
SUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WASHOE COUNTY CODE BY CLARIFYING THE MEANING OF
More informationSUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO.
SUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WASHOE COUNTY CODE BY CLARIFYING THE MEANING OF
More informationSTATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION Ocean Club Townhomes at Jupiter Condominium
More informationTITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL
10-1 TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1. IN GENERAL. 2. DOGS. 3. VICIOUS DOGS. CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL SECTION 10-101. Running at large prohibited. 10-102. Keeping near a residence or business restricted.
More informationIN THE COUNTY COURT IN AND FOR BAY COUNTY, FLORIDA
Filing # 35984288 E-Filed 12/29/2015 03:25:17 PM IN THE COUNTY COURT IN AND FOR BAY COUNTY, FLORIDA BAY COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL, Petitioner/Appellant vs. Case No.: 2015-2797-CC JOHNATHON JONES, Respondent/Appellee.
More information1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.
1 SB232 2 190459-2 3 By Senators Livingston and Scofield 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18 Page 0 1 190459-2:n:01/25/2018:KBH/tgw LSA2018-479R1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SYNOPSIS:
More informationCHAPTER 6.10 DANGEROUS DOG AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG
CHAPTER 6.10 DANGEROUS DOG AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG CITY OF MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE Sections: 6.10.010 Title 6.10.020 Applicability 6.10.030 Definitions 6.10.040 Defense 6.10.050 Declaration of
More informationArticle VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs
Sec. 7-53. Purpose. Article VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs Within the county of Santa Barbara there are potentially dangerous and vicious dogs that have become a serious and widespread
More information93.02 DANGEROUS ANIMALS.
93.02 DANGEROUS ANIMALS. (A) Attack by an animal. It shall be unlawful for any person's animal to inflict or attempt to inflict bodily injury to any person or other animal whether or not the owner is present.
More informationChapter 506. Dangerous and Vicious Animals Adopted July 21, 2008
Chapter 506. Dangerous and Vicious Animals Adopted July 21, 2008 506.01 KEEPING DANGEROUS OR VICIOUS ANIMALS. No person shall keep, harbor or own any dangerous or vicious animal within the City of Lakewood,
More information(2) "Vicious animal" means any animal which represents a danger to any person(s), or to any other domestic animal, for any of the following reasons:
505.16 VICIOUS AND DANGEROUS ANIMALS (a) Definitions. The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this section: (1) "Director of Public Safety" means the City official
More informationPage 47-1 rev
47.01 47.11(1) CHAPTER 47 ANIMAL CONTROL 47.01 Title. 47.02 Purpose. 47.03 Authority. 47.04 Administration. 47.05 Application. 47.06 Definitions. [47.07-47.10 reserved.] 47.11 Rabies Vaccinations Required.
More informationINSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS WITNESS STATEMENT
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS WITNESS STATEMENT 1. Include the Animal Care and Control case number on the upper right hand corner. 2. Please be as accurate and detailed as possible in outlining the
More informationORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ALBANY MUNICIPAL CODE (AMC) 6.18, "DANGEROUS DOGS," AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
ORDINANCE NO. 5769 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ALBANY MUNICIPAL CODE (AMC) 6.18, "DANGEROUS DOGS," AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, current ordinances concerning the classification and disposition of dangerous
More informationTown of Niagara Niagara, Wisconsin 54151
Town of Niagara Niagara, Wisconsin 54151 ANIMAL ORDINANCE Ordinance # Whereby, the Town of Niagara, Marinette County, does hereby adopt Ordinance #, Animal Ordinance, for the purpose of regulating certain
More informationCITY OF MUSKEGO CHAPTER 13 - LICENSING AND REGULATION OF ANIMALS (Ord. # )
CITY OF MUSKEGO CHAPTER 13 - LICENSING AND REGULATION OF ANIMALS (Ord. #647-05-18-89) 13.01 DOGS - (Ord. #647-5-18-89) (1) Statutes Adopted. The current and future provisions of Ch. 174, Wis. Stats., defining
More informationTITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL
0- TITLE 0 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER. IN GENERAL. 2. DOGS. CHAPTER IN GENERAL SECTION 0-0. Running at large prohibited. 0-02. Keeping near a residence or business restricted. 0-03. Pen or enclosure to be
More informationTOWN OF WOODSTOCK ORDINANCE REGULATING DOGS AND WOLF-HYBRIDS
TOWN OF WOODSTOCK ORDINANCE REGULATING DOGS AND WOLF-HYBRIDS SECTION 1. AUTHORITY. This ordinance is adopted by the Select Board of the Town of Woodstock under authority of 20 V.S.A. 3549, 24 V.S.A. 2291
More informationORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, the City of Hamilton (hereinafter referred to. as the City ) is empowered to enact ordinances to protect
ORDINANCE NO. 2009-2 WHEREAS, the City of Hamilton (hereinafter referred to as the City ) is empowered to enact ordinances to protect and to promote the general health and welfare of its citizens and is
More informationTOWN OF POMFRET DOG ORDINANCE Originally Adopted May 22, 1984 Amended December 19, 2012 Amendment adopted October 1, 2014 Effective November 30, 2014
TOWN OF POMFRET DOG ORDINANCE Originally Adopted May 22, 1984 Amended December 19, 2012 Amendment adopted October 1, 2014 Effective November 30, 2014 SECTION 1 AUTHORITY This ordinance is adopted by the
More informationCHAPTER 2.20 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS
CHAPTER 2.20 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS SECTIONS: 2.20.010 DEFINITIONS 2.20.020 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS--DOGS WITHOUT PERMIT PROHIBITED 2.20.030 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS--DECLARATION
More informationPLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING ACADIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT
PLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING ACADIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT Owner(s) Address: Unit No: OF ACADIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., SUN CITY CENTER, FLORIDA Identification
More informationCORYELL COUNTY RABIES CONTROL ORDINANCE NO
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-03 Section 1.1 Authority. SECTION 1 INTENT AND AUTHORITY These regulations are adopted by the Commissioners Court of Coryell County, Texas, acting in its capacity as the governing body
More informationCHAPTER 4 DOG CONTROL
CHAPTER 4 DOG CONTROL SECTION: 5-4-1: Definitions 5-4-2: License Required (Repealed) 5-4-3: License Fees (Repealed) 5-4-4: Unidentified Dogs Running at Large 5-4-5: Record of License (Repealed) 5-4-6:
More informationSTOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER ANIMAL CALLS SUBJECT
STOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER ANIMAL CALLS SUBJECT DATE: January 17,2006 NO: FROM: CHIEF ERIC JONES TO: ALL PERSONNEL INDEX: Animal Calls Dead Animals Handling Injured Animals I. POLICY Field
More informationTOWN OF LANIGAN BYLAW 2/2004
BYLAW 2/2004 A BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF LANIGAN TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROHIBITION OF DANGEROUS DOGS AND THE REGULATION AND CONTROL OF ALL OTHER DOGS INCLUDING LICENSING, RUNNING AT LARGE AND IMPOUNDING. The Council
More informationAN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 405 OF THE CITY OF RICE (REGULATING DOGS & CATS)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 405 OF THE CITY OF RICE (REGULATING DOGS & CATS) The City Council of the City of Rice, Minnesota, hereby ordains that Section 405 (Dogs and Cats) of Chapter IV (Public Safety)
More informationOlney Municipal Code. Title 6 ANIMALS
Title 6 ANIMALS Chapters: 6.04 DOGS AND CATS 6.08 VICIOUS DOGS 6.12 SQUIRRELS 6.16 MISCELLANEOUS ANIMALS Page 1 of 9 Chapter 6.04 DOGS AND CATS Sections: 6.04.010 Vaccination against rabies required--vaccination
More informationORDINANCE NO
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-15 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OR REGULATING THE OWNING OR KEEPING OF DANGEROUS ANIMALS INCLUDING PIT BULL DOGS AND PROVIDING FOR REGISTRATION FOR CERTAIN DANGEROUS ANIMALS, AND PROVIDING
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 30, 2016. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. Nos. 3D16-314 & 3D15-2609 Lower Tribunal No. 13-18732
More informationORDINANCE NO RESOLUTION NO APPROVING A DANGEROUS DOG ORDINANCE Chisago County, Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 07-3 RESOLUTION NO. 070620-4 APPROVING A DANGEROUS DOG ORDINANCE Chisago County, Minnesota AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS AND THE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES
More informationTOWN OF GORHAM ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
TOWN OF GORHAM ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE Adopted - April 7, 2009 Effective - May 7, 2009 Amended March 2, 2010 1 TOWN OF GORHAM ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE Section 1. Purpose 1.1 The purpose of this ordinance
More informationTITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL 1 CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL
10-1 TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL 1 CHAPTER 1. IN GENERAL. 2. DOGS AND CATS. CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL SECTION 10-101. Running at large prohibited. 10-102. Keeping near a residence or business restricted. 10-103.
More information1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.
1 SB232 2 191591-3 3 By Senators Livingston and Scofield 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18 Page 0 1 SB232 2 3 4 ENROLLED, An Act, 5 Relating to dogs; to create Emily's
More informationANIMAL CONTROL IN BROWN COUNTY. Impoundment and Disposition of Animals Redemption and Destruction of Impounded Animals
TITLE 8 ANIMAL CONTROL IN BROWN COUNTY CHAPTER 8.01 CHAPTER 8.02 CHAPTER 8.03 CHAPTER 8.04 CHAPTER 8.05 CHAPTER 8.06 CHAPTER 8.07 CHAPTER 8.08 CHAPTER 8.09 CHAPTER 8.10 CHAPTER 8.11 CHAPTER 8.12 CHAPTER
More informationTitle 6. Animals* Chapters: 6.05 Dangerous Dogs 6-1. * For nuisance provisions regarding animals, see LMC , , and
Title 6 Animals* Chapters: 6.05 Dangerous Dogs * For nuisance provisions regarding animals, see LMC 8.10.040, 8.10.050, and 8.10.180. 6-1 Lyons Municipal Code 6.05.020 Chapter 6.05 Dangerous Dogs Sections:
More informationAPPENDIX B TOWN OF CLINTON DOG ORDINANCE
APPENDIX B TOWN OF CLINTON DOG ORDINANCE TOWN OF CLINTON DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE ADOPTED NOVEMBER 7, 2000 REVISED JUNE 8, 2004 SECTION l. PURPOSE: This ordinance is adopted in the exercise of municipal home
More informationCounty Board of County Commissioners to provide and maintain for the residents
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-44 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BAKER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES TO DETERMINE ANIMALS ARE DANGEROUS; REGULATING DANGEROUS AND RABID DOGS; AUTHORIZING EUTHANIZATION
More informationBY-LAW 48 DOG CONTROL BY-LAW
BY-LAW 48 DOG CONTROL BY-LAW Title 1. This By-Law shall be known and may be cited as the Dog Control By-Law and is enacted to provide for the orderly control of dogs in the County of Inverness. 2. This
More informationTITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL
10-1 CHAPTER 1. IN GENERAL. 2. DOGS AND CATS. 3. DANGEROUS ANIMALS. TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL SECTION 10-101. Running at large prohibited. 10-102. Keeping near a residence or business
More informationDraft for Public Hearing. Town of East Haddam. Chapter (Number to be Assigned) CONTROL OF ANIMALS ORDINANCE
Draft for Public Hearing Town of East Haddam Chapter (Number to be Assigned) CONTROL OF ANIMALS ORDINANCE???-1. Purpose.???-2. Definitions.???-3. Licensing, Roaming, and Removal of Animal Waste. A. License
More informationTITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL
10-1 TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1. IN GENERAL. 2. DOGS/CATS. 3. HORSES. CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL SECTION 10-101. Running at large prohibited. 10-102. Keeping near a residence or business restricted. 10-103.
More informationTHE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE NO. 1_8_1_9_:_{ O An ordinance amending Sections 53.18.5 and 53.63 and adding Section 53.34.3 to Article 3, Chapter 5 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) to authorize the Department of Animal
More informationCity of San Mateo BARKING DOG COMPLAINTS
San Mateo Police Department 200 Franklin Parkway San Mateo, California 94403-1921 Support Services: (650) 522-7620 www.cityofsanmateo.org Dear San Mateo Resident: Enclosed in this Barking Dog Complaint
More informationCITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 411
CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 411 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTERS 1, 2, AND 8 OF THE CITY CODE TO IMPLEMENT NEW REGULATIONS GOVERNING DOGS WITHIN THE CITY THE CITY OF STERLING
More information508.02 DEFINITIONS. When used in this article, the following words, terms, and phrases, and their derivations shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates
More informationCITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.
CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTERS 1, 2, AND 8 OF THE CITY CODE TO IMPLEMENT NEW REGULATIONS GOVERNING DOGS WITHIN THE CITY THE CITY OF STERLING
More informationDog Licensing Regulation
Ordinance No: 07-04 Dog Licensing Regulation STATE OF WISCONSIN Town of Morrison Brown County SECTION 1 TITLE/PURPOSE The title of this ordinance is the Town of Morrison Dog Licensing Regulation. The purpose
More informationORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCATA PERTAINING TO VICIOUS, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND PUBLIC NUISANCE DOGS
ORDINANCE NO. 1365 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCATA PERTAINING TO VICIOUS, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND PUBLIC NUISANCE DOGS TITLE V SANITATION & HEALTH CHAPTER 2 ANIMALS ARTICLE 1 DOGS
More informationPLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING FAIRFIELD A CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT
PLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING FAIRFIELD A CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT Owner(s) Address: Unit No: OF FAIRFIELD A CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., SUN CITY CENTER, FLORIDA Identification
More informationTOWN OF LUDLOW, VERMONT DOG ORDINANCE
TOWN OF LUDLOW, VERMONT DOG ORDINANCE 1. Enabling Authority 2. Definitions 3. Licensing 4. Confinement / Control 5. Authorized Agent 6. Dog in Heat 7. Animal Control Officer Duties 8. General Violation
More informationANIMALS ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL
ANIMALS ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 6-1. Appointment of an Animal Control Officer. The City Manager shall appoint an Animal Control Officer as authorized n Section 31 of the Charter. Sec. 6-2. Enforcement
More informationSt. Paul City Ordinance
St. Paul City Ordinance Title XX. Chapter 200. Section. 200.11. Potentially dangerous animals. (a) Potentially dangerous animals. A potentially dangerous animal is an animal which has: (1) When unprovoked,
More informationocpetinfo.com (714) Tips for owners of Barking Dogs:. The key to silencing barking is understanding
Tips for owners of Barking Dogs:. The key to silencing barking is understanding why your dog is barking to find the appropriate solution. Provide your dog with plenty of space and increase their amount
More informationPLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING FAIRBOURNE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT
PLEASE READ ENTIRE AGREEMENT BEFORE SIGNING FAIRBOURNE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. PET AGREEMENT Owner(s) Address: Unit No: OF FAIRBOURNE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., SUN CITY CENTER, FLORIDA Identification
More informationAN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OR REGULATING THE OWNING OR KEEPING OF PIT BULL DOGS, PROVIDING FOR PERMITS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS
AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OR REGULATING THE OWNING OR KEEPING OF PIT BULL DOGS, PROVIDING FOR PERMITS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY
More informationCHAPTER XII ANIMALS. .2 ANIMAL. Animal means every living creature, other than man, which may be affected by rabies.
CHAPTER XII ANIMALS 1.0 PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to promote a harmonious relationship between man and animal through established conduct and procedures when man and animals interact so as
More informationOrdinance for the Control of Dogs
Ordinance for the Control of Dogs TOWN OF GUILFORD, VERMONT AN ORDINANCE FOR THE CONTROL OF DOGS Pursuant to the authority conveyed to Towns as codified in 20 V.S.A. 3549 ET SEQ. AND 24 V.S.A. 2291(10),
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY
SCANNEDON 1011612013... SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: g?&.. 2.c :. - *; - I. I, Justice PART L)t Index Number : 402392/2010 KOVALEVICH, MARCIA vs. RHEA, JOHN B. SEQUENCE
More informationANIMAL CONTROL CITY ANIMAL ORDINANCE
ANIMAL CONTROL CITY ANIMAL ORDINANCE Definitions At Large A dog shall be at large when not confined to the premises of the owner or under restraint when away form the premises of the owner. Confinement
More information(3) A physical description of each such animal, including any pet names to which it might respond;
Council Bluffs, Iowa Chapter 4.20 ANIMAL CONTROL Article I Humane Animal Treatment and Control 4.20.110 Regulation of keeping of dangerous animals. (a) Every person, firm, or corporation owning, keeping,
More informationTitle 6 ANIMALS. Chapter 6.04 DOGS AND CATS. Vaccination against rabies required--vaccination tag.
Chapters: 6.04 DOGS AND CATS 6.08 VICIOUS DOGS 6.12 SQUIRRELS 6.16 MISCELLANEOUS ANIMALS Title 6 ANIMALS Chapter 6.04 DOGS AND CATS Sections: 6.04.010 Vaccination against rabies required--vaccination tag.
More informationGALLATIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NO GALLATIN COUNTY DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE
GALLATIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2015-1. Purpose and Legislative Findings. Uncontrolled dogs present a danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Gallatin County. The Gallatin
More informationSUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO A Bylaw to regulate the keeping of dogs within the Keats Island Dog Control Service Area
SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO. 691 A Bylaw to regulate the keeping of dogs within the Keats Island Dog Control Service Area WHEREAS the Sunshine Coast Regional District has established a service
More informationCLEAR LAKE TOWNSHIP SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA. Ordinance No. ORD Regulation of Dogs and Other Domestic Animals Ordinance
CLEAR LAKE TOWNSHIP SHERBURNE COUNTY, MINNESOTA Ordinance No. ORD-2002-002 Regulation of Dogs and Other Domestic Animals Ordinance The Town Board of the Township of Clear Lake, County of Sherburne, State
More informationORDINANCE NO. 14,951
ORDINANCE NO. 14,951 AN ORDINANCE to amend the Municipal Code of the City of Des Moines, Iowa, 2000, adopted by Ordinance No. 13,827, passed June 5, 2000, and amended by Ordinance No. 13,854 passed August
More informationCHAPTER 604 TOWN OF SCARBOROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
CHAPTER 604 TOWN OF SCARBOROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE Adopted 02/16/2000 Amended 05/19/2004 Amended 04/20/2011 Amended 05/07/2014 604-1 Purpose... 1 604-2 Definitions... 1 1. ABANDONED ANIMAL:... 1
More informationCORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE BY-LAW NUMBER Being a By-law for the Control and Licensing of Dogs
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE BY-LAW NUMBER 2012-103 Being a By-law for the Control and Licensing of Dogs WHEREAS The Municipal Act, R.S.O., 2001 section 103 authorizes the Council of a municipality
More informationIN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF GALLIPOLIS, onto
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF GALLIPOLIS, onto STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff Case No. 14 CRB 157 AIL -vs- JASON HARRIS Defendant MEMORANDUM OF DEFENDANT, JASON HARRIS Pursuant to this Court's Order, Defendant, Jason
More informationRunning at large prohibited. No cat shall be permitted to run at large within the limits of this City.
504.00 ANIMAL CONTROL. 504.01 Running at large prohibited. No cat shall be permitted to run at large within the limits of this City. 504.02 Cats on leash. All cats within the City shall be on a leash unless
More informationC. Penalty: Penalty for failure to secure said license shall be as established by Council resolution for the entire year. (Ord.
5-2-1 5-2-1 CHAPTER 2 DOGS SECTION: 5-2-1: License Required; Exemption 5-2-2: License Fee 5-2-3: Term Of License 5-2-4: Publication Of Notice 5-2-5: Application For License 5-2-6: Restrictions And Prohibited
More informationANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE FOR THE TOWN OF BURKE ADOPTED: OCTOBER 1, 2001 EFFECTIVE: DECEMBER 1, 2001 ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE FOR THE TOWN OF BURKE ADOPTED: OCTOBER 1, 2001 EFFECTIVE: DECEMBER 1, 2001 ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE PURPOSE: The Select Board of the Town of Burke being mindful of the fact that
More informationTitle 6 ANIMALS. Chapter 6.04 DOG *
6.04.010 Title 6 ANIMALS Chapters: 6.04 Dogs 6.08 Restrictions on Keeping Certain Animals 6.09 Animal Control Sections: Chapter 6.04 DOG * 6.04.010 Definitions. 6.04.020 License required. 6.04.030 Immunization
More informationVILLAGE OF ROSEMARY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA BYLAW NO 407/09
VILLAGE OF ROSEMARY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA BYLAW NO 407/09 BEING A BYLAW OF THE VILLAGE OF ROSEMARY, IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA TO PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSING, REGULATING, AND CONFINEMENT OF DOGS WHEREAS,
More informationVILLAGE OF ROSEMARY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA BYLAW NO 407/09 And AMENDMENT with BYLAW 428/11
VILLAGE OF ROSEMARY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA BYLAW NO 407/09 And AMENDMENT with BYLAW 428/11 BEING A BYLAW OF THE VILLAGE OF ROSEMARY, IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA TO PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSING, REGULATING,
More informationORDINANCE NO
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-07 Item 2-5 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LEMOORE AMENDING SECTIONS 3 AND 77 OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 5 AND ADDING SECTIONS 80, 29, 30 AND 31 OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 5 OF
More informationTIMBER RIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION POLICY RESOLUTION 2008 CONTROL OF PETS
TIMBER RIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION POLICY RESOLUTION 2008 CONTROL OF PETS WHEREAS, Article, III. Paragraph (1) of the By Laws grant the Board, Officers of the Association, specifically conferred upon
More informationBISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE NO BISHOP PAIUTE RESERVATION BISHOP, CALIFORNIA
BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE BISHOP PAIUTE RESERVATION BISHOP, CALIFORNIA DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE NO. 2009-02 ADOPTED June 24, 2009 Bishop Paiute Tribe Bishop Paiute Tribal Ordinance No. 2009-02 Regulating the Vaccination
More informationDANGEROUS DOGS AND WILD ANIMALS
58.01 Authorization 58.10 Pit Bull Dogs Presumed Dangerous 58.02 Purpose and Intent 58.11 Notification of Intent to Impound 58.03 Definitions 58.12 Immediate Impoundment 58.04 Procedure for Declaring a
More informationArgued May 9, 2017 Decided September 5, Before Judges Messano and Espinosa.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding
More informationCHAPTER 5 ANIMALS. Owner: Any person, group of persons, or corporation owning, keeping or harboring animals.
CHAPTER 5 ANIMALS ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL 5-1. Definitions Animal impoundment officer: The person or persons employed or contracted by the Town as its enforcement officer or officers, or the person of persons
More informationARTICLE 5 HEALTH CHAPTER 8 ANIMALS
ARTICLE 5 HEALTH CHAPTER 8 ANIMALS SECTION 5-8-1 Definitions 5-8-2 License 5-8-3 Application 5-8-4 Fees 5-8-5 Registration and Tag 5-8-6 Dogs, Cats, Number Limited 5-8-7 Animals at Large 5-8-8 Impounding
More informationSeptember 25, Glynn County Board of Commissioners. Matt Doering, Chief of Police
Glynn County Police Department 157 Public Safety Boulevard Dispatch (912) 554-3645 Brunswick, Georgia 31525 Administration (912) 554-7800 www.police.glynncounty-ga.org Fax (912) 554-7885 September 25,
More information(3) BODILY INJURY means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
3-1-1 3-1-1 DEFINITIONS. In this title: (1) ANIMAL CONTROL AUTHORITY means an animal control office owned, operated, leased or contracted by the city with authority over the area in which the dog is kept.
More informationORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOWNDES COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, PROVIDING FOR THE CONTROL OF DOMESTIC ANIMALS IN LOWNDES COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI.
LOWNDES COUNTY 1 ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOWNDES COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, PROVIDING FOR THE CONTROL OF DOMESTIC ANIMALS IN LOWNDES COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. A. Domestic
More informationChapter 8.02 DOGS AND CATS
Chapter 8.02 DOGS AND CATS 8.02.010 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, certain terms used herein shall be interpreted, implied, or defined as follows: 1) "Animal control officer" means all
More information