Part Four—Animal Cruelty Cases After The State v. Gerard Decision
This is the fourth article of a five-part series on animal cruelty laws in Minnesota. This article will discuss the State v. Gerard decision and examine the impact the decision may have on the “unjustifiable” standard. While the court of appeals has rendered several decisions giving the lower courts insight on how “unjustifiable” standard in Minnesota Statutes section […]
Part Three—A Look At The Case Law: What Is An “Unjustified” Action Under The Minnesota Animal Cruelty Statute?
In this third article of a five-part series on animal cruelty, we will learn what is considered an “unjustified” action in Minnesota. To prove animal torture or cruelty, the State must provide evidence that shows beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant’s act, omission or neglect caused or permitted unnecessary or unjustifiable pain, suffering, or death […]
A Brief History Of The Animal Cruelty Standard In Minnesota
CONTENT: In this second article of a five-part series on animal cruelty, we will look at the history of animal cruelty laws in Minnesota. Early Standard Animal cruelty laws did not exist at common law; rather, such laws are statutory in nature. See Stephens v. State, 65 Miss. 329, 331, 3 So. 458, 459 (1888) […]
What Constitutes Justifiable Action under the Minnesota Animal Cruelty Statute?
The law in Minnesota regarding dog bites is favorable to dog bite victims. The law covers bites and other injuries, incorporates an expansive definition of “owner,” including someone who merely harbors or keeps the dog, and it is not subject to the comparative negligence defense. Related to the concept of dog bites, is that of animal cruelty, and you […]
