A veterinarian, as most of us know, is a licensed professional who treats domestic animal injuries or diseases. The key here is the word licensed to distinguish between a lay person or unlicensed veterinarian. (Corpus Juris 1929)

Veterinarians treat animals which are personal property of their owners. The owner has sole authority for treatment or destruction of their property. We must keep in mind though that should an animal disease endanger the health and welfare to the public the owner’s decision regarding their property are void. Veterinarians are then tasked with certain emergency acts such as depopulation, vaccination, or quarantine of animals.

Owners of animals, or their designated agents, may perform and treat animals normally considered under the practice of veterinary medicine without guilt or penalty in most states. The exception to this is when a disease may pose a threat to human health, an owner is then compelled to use a veterinarian for treatment or depopulation. Laws and regulations pertaining to health and welfare of the public as referenced in Corpus Juris 195, Hannah 1990, and lastly in 1993.

State Legislatures are empowered by law to make and enforce laws governing veterinary medicine. A tax is levied when a veterinarian takes his or her examination and is granted a license. The licensing program also is used as a means of registration all veterinarians and for keeping all information of their practice in one place.

In summary, a veterinarian practices the art Veterinary science. With the exception of an emergency animal disease outbreak, an owner has absolute right in property to determine what treatment or disposal of his or her own animals.

From the trenches,
Celeste

This is an article written by the Ag Law Center on the Right to Farm. Though very long it addresses many issues farmers face as urbanization encroaches upon us. This very thorough examination hits many state and federal statutes that are critical to our understanding so that we can carry on traditional farming through down our generations. I noted what other states were doing and, yes, Washington is addressed. Some of the topics include nuisance laws and invasion. Invasion is not only physical invasion but includes limitation of what you can do with your property. This is an excellent overview of property rights, where we are legally, and Constiutionally.

The Right to Farm

From the trenches…and Happy Father’s Day, to all the Dad’s out there!
Celeste

We commonly think of being a owner of an animal as being a keeper of an animal but that is not always the case. Under common law and in present days statute (s) either an owner or a keeper of an animal may be responsible for any damages caused by an animal.

A keeper need not be the owner of an animal. The fact is that the keeper, for purposes of imposition of liability, is one who exercises control over an animal on his premises with knowledge of its presence, whether he be owner, or baliee.

The keeper, like an owner, has the duty and responsibility to provide for the restraining and confinement of any animal under his control. An equivalent term often used “a person who harbors.” Keeping and harboring implies an intent to exercise control over an animal and to provide food and shelter on more than a casual basis. The keeper may be distinct from the owner, and may have an interest adverse to the owner. Courts have found that temporary care did not rise to the dignity of having possession and control of the animal.

A person cannot be made a keeper by actions of an animal if it is clear the individual does not exercise and does not wish to exercise control over the animal. There mere presence of an animal on a person’s property does not make that person a keeper of an animal, even if the individual deals in those animals.

There is one situation where the courts have shown a willingness to hold a landowner as a keeper even though there was no actual control by the landowner over the animal. Liability may arise where the following conditions are met:

• Landowner is aware of animal on premises.
• Landowner is in expectation of financial reward because of the animal’s presence.
• The landowner could have exercised some degree of control, especially as related to safety, over the animal.

While it might appear that the court is merely allowing the injured party access to a “deep pocket of money” there is equity in such a ruling. If the landowner was hoping for a financial benefit by the presence of the animal he should bear the financial risk of the animal’s presence.

One area of concern deals with animals within the family setting. Often legal title will reside with one family member and yet control and care of the animal are either joint responsibility or the responsibility of someone not the title owner. A man who buys a pet for his daughter, being the minimal keeper of both providing food, shelter, etc… has the ultimate responsibility for both children and pets (Prickett v. Farrell, 455 SW 2d 74 (Ark. 1970) yet the father was held responsible for the actions of a horse given to his son in (Blakely, supra note 47).

From the trenches,
Celeste

(For educational purposes only)

A [person] who makes, alters, or repairs personal property at the request of the owner (voluntary?) or legal possessor has a lien on the property for personal charges.

A lien is a claim or charge (tax?) on property for the payment for a debt, obligation, or duty. Liens may be created by contract, express or implied. They are the hold or claim on the property of another as security for a debt. A lien is held until one of two things occurs: At death, one of the parties terminates the lien. Or, the debt is paid through another mutually satisfactory arrangement, typically in the favor of the lien holder.

A lien continues to exist until one of two things happens: the lien is discharged to the lien holders in satisfaction or when the asset disappears. Either the debt is paid off or some other arrangement is made to the satisfaction of the lien holder. An example of the importance of the lien of the importance of the lien holder is NE Kansas 1985.

In legal glossaries there is a tern called an agistor. An agistor holds lien on animals he is boarding or keeping until his services are paid. A lien is dependent upon the continual possession of the animals by the agistor. If the animals are surrendered to the owner the lien is no longer void. Some jurisdictions allow for the sale of livestock at a public auction and apply the proceeds of the liquidation to the debt incurred. (Ahisede 1971, Crough 1959) Some states specifically say that the state vet has a lien on animals dependent on possession for their care and medical treatment. Most states hold that the legal concept of a lien for a veterinarian is valid (Corp Juris 1992)

A lien is also in effect for abandoned animals. The vet must post a notice at the confinement area and then within the specified time ‘humanely’ dispose the unclaimed animals. Animals may not be turned over for scientific experimentation, to a pound or other public agency. Aways check your state statute, liens to agistors with the right to convert personal property (animals) into money.

From the trenches,
Celeste

Premises liability is the responsibility of the owner(s) of the real propertyfor injuries sustained by parties roaming onto the property.

Liability for bodily injury may occur from a breach of duty owned to the injured party. This duty is obligated to meet certain standards maintaining the safety of business properties. The question we ask are properties signed up for NAIS considered commercial? These standards must be met for invitees, those legitimately coming onto the property for business purposes, but not for trespassers or illegal burglars. An invitee is anyone entering the property with the occupier permission, or by initiation. The invitee comes on the land with the assurance and understanding that reasonable care has been taken to maintain the premises and make it safe for the invitee. Pickup and delivery persons are regarded as invitees by the mutual benefit rule; they are invitees because their function is necessary to the occupier of the property.

When entering a veterinarian premise, legally, a clients are invitees entering onto the veterinarian’s premises on business. The veterinarian has the obligation to those coming onto to his property recognized by law; a safe place to enter and do business; hence waiting room, exam room, safe parking lot etc… If a veterinarian does not have or maintain premises identification or his business in unsafe for any reason, then he is considered liable. This poses some interesting questions pertaining to the NAIS

• This may be the reason that a veterinarian chooses to participate in obtaining and maintaining a premises number, to convey to the public that his place of business is safe. Does the veterinarian then becomes obligated to ‘share’ or ‘collaborate’ animal information to the NAIS database whether that be state , federal or global.

• What information is transmitted to the NAIS? There is a vast difference
between a flu cough and mad cow.

• How does the veterinarian determine what is reportable?

• Is your vet in a cooperative agreement with your State Ag Department or USDA?

• Who owns the information acquired on your animal? For instance: your animal has a blood test. Is this information your property? I know from past experience, whether it is my own blood work or an animal, it is supremely difficult to obtain a copy of lab work. When I do successfully obtain a copy:

• Who else has this information or where else is it disseminated?

All of us should be asking these questions our veterinarians, if we choose to continue to use them.

From the trenches,
Celeste

Extraction from The Law of Animals-A Treatise on Property in Animals
Wild and Domestic and the Rights and Responsibilities Arising Therefrom

John Ingham

For Educational Purposes Only

The common law doctrine, which began with dogs not being the subject of larceny, has been abrogated by a statute imposing a tax which is recognition that (dogs) are property. In days yonder, a tax was imposed upon the dog to fund the school fund and not to be used to kill sheep killed by dogs. In places where dogs were not held to the larceny statute the court said, “If dogs were taxed in Indiana as other than property revenue purposes, it would be strong circumstance to show an intent on the part of the legislature to abrogate the common law rule and make them subjects of larceny like any other personal property. But, so far as we are advised dogs have never been thus taxed. A specific tax has been from time to time levied upon dogs and when collected applied generally, if not always, to payment for sheep killed by them. […] These specific taxes upon dogs can be upheld only on the ground that they are not revenue measures, but police regulations.”

“License taxes on dogs to be paid over to a fund to compensate sheep owners for their losses caused by dogs are considered unconstitutional as creating a fund to the advantage of one portion of the community against another.” In a case in Indiana “the plain purpose and intent of this act is not to provide revenue for public uses, but to discourage the keeping of dogs.” It indicates the policy of the State to protect one species of valuable property from destruction by another species, which is in terms declared useless…It is a matter of no consequence how the sum charged to the owner of a dog may be collected. It is to be deemed more convenient to place it upon the tax duplicate, it does not therefore make it a tax and subject to Constitutional objection. Mitchell v Williams, 27 Ind. 62; Cole v Hall, 103 Ill. 30 “Refusing to take out a dog license is not an “offense of a trifling nature,” within the meaning of the statute regulating appeals from summary convictions before justice: Phillips v. Evans [1896] 1 Q..B. 305

In a similar case, “We cannot assent to the position take by the appellant that if the sum required for a license exceeds the expense in issuing it, the act transcends the licensing power and imposes a tax. By such a theory, the police power would be shown of all its efficiency. The exercise of that power is based upon the idea that the business licensed or kind or property regulated is likely to work mischief and therefore needs restraints which shall operate as a protection to be paid to the public.” Tenny v. Lenz, 16 Wisc. 566

Complaints made be made by any person(s) Not merely b police officers and constables on whom the duty is specifically imposed by statute. State v Howard (NH), 43 Atl Rep. 592

The Fact that a man applied for a license to keep a dog is competent evidence that he was owner or keeper of the dog, where a complaint was brought against him for not having a license. Com. V Gorman, 82 Mass. 601

In the case where a dog was held not to be ‘property’ so as to be liable to be taxed ad valorem as other property, it was held also that an act making dogs subject to a “tax” of one dollar per annum to be paid by their owners or habors under penalty of five dollars plus costs, was not technically a tax but legitimate police regulation, and the court said quoting Cooley on Taxation, 601: “Though a tax is sometimes levied for revenue upon keepers of dogs, it is more usual to require the keeping to be licensed, the prinicipal object being to have some person responsible for every animal of the kind that is protected by the law… It is noted that the act we are considering is in harmony with this view, and is ‘An act to levy a tax on the privilege of keeping or harboring dogs.’” Ex parte Cooper, 3 Tex. App. 489; Kidd v. Reynolds (Texas Civ. App), 50 S.W. Rep. 600

On the other hand it is said in a case in the District of Columbia:” The law recognizes property in abd to dogs, and the owner thereof is entitled to his rememdies for an invasion of his property. This is too well settled in England and in the US to now be questioned. Continue reading →

For Educational Purposes only. Always seek licensed legal counsel.

We all enter into contractual agreements every day without even knowing it. In our opposition to NAIS it is important for us to understand the Contractual Agreement tool.

Contractual agreements are of ancient origin. There are two types of contractual agreements: Express or Implied. Contractual agreements can be either verbal or written. Contrary to common thought, verbal contracts are binding and enforceable. An oral agreement is binding subject to some statutory requirements including the understanding of what is involved in the contract. Both parties must intend to enter into a contractual agreement.

Express Contractual Agreement

An express agreement is a contract entered into between two or more parties. The terms and the conditions of the contract are expressly stated and agreed upon, by the involved parties. Oftentimes, the money is exchanged for a product or service.

Implied Contractual Agreement

• This type of agreement is called implied because the parties do not make a definitive agreement beforehand as to the duties each is to perform.
• No discussion is involved
• There is an assumption by both parties that a reasonable exchange of goods and services.
• There is a reasonable expectation of some type of performance.
• There is intent and mutual agreement
• Surrendering or giving up something one legally possesses

Capacity of the individual is taken into account in contractual agreements. If a person is mentally challenged contracts are not usually binding. If a contract is made while a person is inebriated these contracts are binding. Agreements with minors should not be made with the exception of health or survival. The age one can enter into a contractual agreement varies from 21 down to 19 years of age. Check your state statutes. A minor may make any contract he signed as a minor null and void when he becomes of age.

Consideration is an important part of a contractual agreement. Consideration is the surrendering of each party to the terms of the contract. Each party has agreed to surrender or give something up that he or she legally possess or is entitled to possess. Continue reading →

Animals are physical entities and are not typically associated with particular real property and so are classified as personal property of the owner. Animals are unique in that they have the ability to move on their own volition , produce offspring, and require care. They are living beings which fall under the category of personal property. In the current flux of agricultural law the issue rapidly becomes to whom title of such animal personal property belong?

Animals in the United States can either be private property or the property of the state.

Title by Birth

Most farmers and ranchers have the enjoy the Latin term partus seqitu,r title by birth. Ownership of a newborn animal lies with the owner of the mother regardless of the title upon the land upon which the mother is maintained. Carruth v. Easterling, 150 So2d 852 (Miss) 1963 Ownership continues unless divested by contract, into the indefinite future. The newborn is referred to as the “increase” and may subsequently have offspring of its own, and the ownership continues onward with the mother. There are two reasons for this:

1. The sire (father) of the offspring may be difficult to ascertain.

2. The mother (dam) is often of little economic value during pregnancy, yet must be maintained at the owner’s expense. Therefore, in fairness, the mandate would be for the offspring to go to the owner of the mother. Ownership may be joint, but if it is divided between a life tenant and a future increase holder, then the increase shall belong to the present possessor life tenant, unless the grantor expresses a contrary interest. It has been suggested that the lawful possession gives right to presumption of title.

Ownership of a newborn can be contracted before birth.

Based Animal Law, Favre and Loring

Things to contemplate when considering if you should join up to voluntarily participate in the contractual NAIS. Your state has signed extensive documents including the infamous SF 424B when it took money to implement the NAIS. Do those obligations carry down to you an animal owner under state jurisdiction? It we be best to obtain licensed and qualified legal advice before signing up or sharing your contact information with all state agencies promoting volunteer programs.

From the trenches,
Celeste

History of Animal Law

In helping us understand our mission and responsibilities as animal owners it is important that we understand the history of animal law as it has developed through the centuries.

Animal law historically originated through verbal communications passed down usually in religious belief systems through families and communities. Two systems of law survived and are in use today: Roman Civil Law and English Common Law. Roman Civil Law began around 3000 year with the Twelve Tables engraved in clay and addressed trade, business and criminal activities. Roman law represented formalism, rigidity, and strict application with limited flexibility. Written law addressed both people and property. Roman law reached England around the 2nd century. By the time of the 10th century the English established their own customs and laws which later became known as English Common Law. This system believes in individualism and that the individual’s rights must be protected by government. With the coming of the Norman’s to England they brought with them in part the concept of legal tribunals. Law and state became one during this period without interpretation rendering useless much of the existing legal system.

The foundation of English Common Law was established in 1215 CE with the Magna Carta, which introduced courts, juries, due process, protection from excessive bail or fines, cruel and unusual punishment, and the inalienable rights of the individual. This foundation was carried to the Colonies in the United States. The Supreme court has referred over 100 times in 25 years to the Magna Carta.

In the United States English Common Law was divided into four sections: constitutional, criminal, commercial and private law.

What is Statutory Law?

Many of us have heard over the last few years that NAIS does not have statutory authority. What does this mean to you and me? Statutory authority represents the decisions of a legislature or law-governing body, separating it from court decisions. Statutory law is recorded in statute books which describe and define relationship and responsibility of government, and relationship of individuals with their government. It establishes duties in personal relationships and requires workable and applicable definitions between the interest of a person and the public. The legal principles of your state constitution is founded in this statutory law. The emphasis was on the state to protect the federal government from overstepping its bounds, although a state constitution may not violate the federal constitution. Our United States legal system is set up the Constitution, Article III, section 1.

Animals and the Law

In ancient times animals were responsible for their actions. Trials were held and if an animal was found guilty of committing a crime the law of retaliation was applied which is an eye for an eye, the animal was punished. In ancient Persia animals was dealt with as responsible beings and according to religious law. Around the 9th century you will see record of animal trials. This continued until the 1500’s when a French lawyer represented a group of rats. They rats had been accused of wrongfully eating citizen barley. This attorney defended the rat group. In a brilliant pleading the rats were acquitted of their crime.

Noxious wild animals were tried in Ecclesiastical court. G-d has jurisdiction over the life of an animal.

Why force capital punishment on an animal?

• If an animal has killed, injured, or damaged property it may do so again.
• By punishing the culprit the court has protected its citizens against harm.
• Punishment deters repeat offenses.
• Punishments can be aimed at animal owners.
• Animal owners could be deprived of their property or through fines to ensure compliance with maintenance and confinement guidelines.

In the past domestic animals could be arrested, tried, convicted, and killed if found guilty and had much the same status as people. They domestic creatures had legal protection under the law and in the courts. Interestingly, domestic animals were tried in civil court while wild animals were tried in religious court. Pest control in 880 CE was to put a bounty on the head of an vicious insect, swarm, or rodents. From 864 CE through the 1700’s records are show trails for a variety of animals from bees, swine to bovine. Jail cells and “treatment” was accorded equally for accused man and beast alike. A recent case was a circus elephant who trampled a man and was sentenced to the gallows.

The following is an overview of animal law. Study it carefully as there is nothing new under the sun. What once was might well be a model of the future.

From the trenches,
Celeste

Exercise of Police Powers by the State

The following is a synopsis from a book entitled Animal Law by Favre and Loring with some observations from myself.

Society, through laws, even in ancient times has sought to control various aspects of animal ownership and agriculture in general. Areas often addressed are animal migration, control of communicable and infectious diseases, depopulation with compensation and the likes.

So where does police power fit into the agricultural picture? It is a term referred to power of the “50 states, derived from sovereignty and to pass legislation that is binding upon members of society. Anytime a new law is passed, or a regulation is promulgated by an agency, there is an exercise of police power. That is a concept that is foreign to most farmers with exception of criminal instances. “While it seems at times this power may seem limitless, such is not the case. It is the judiciary’s role to determine whether or not a particular law or regulation is the proper exercise of police power. If the exercise of police power is found to be improper, then, in effect, the courts have declared the law void and unenforceable”.

Let’s give a real life example: When I had my first child I lived in a four-plex. One of the other occupants had two little dachshunds. These little dogs enjoyed doing their business on our front porch. This next part is example: I go to my Representative and asked that all dogs be destroyed in the state because of this trouble. He drafts a bill and it passes both the house and Senate and is signed into law by the Governor. Even though it could possibly be argued for the purposes of health and safety the judiciary would find the legislature’s response disproportionate to the risk to be controlled, hence unreasonable.

Our legislature passes laws which help to keep us healthy, provide safety, and the welfare of its citizenry. Proposed legislation must be reasonable and not arbitrary.

Police Power and the Farmer at the Federal Level

We have established that an exercise of police power could be considered improper… Continue reading →