Utah

Share |

UT - Lien - § 38-2-1. Lien on livestock--For feed and care

Summary: Every ranchman, farmer, agistor, herder of cattle, tavern keeper or livery stable keeper to whom any domestic animals shall be entrusted for the purpose of feeding, herding or pasturing shall have a lien upon such animals for the amount that may be due him for such feeding, herding or pasturing, and is authorized to retain possession of such animals until such amount is paid.

Every ranchman, farmer, agistor, herder of cattle, tavern keeper or livery stable keeper to whom any domestic animals shall be entrusted for the purpose of feeding, herding or pasturing shall have a lien upon such animals for the amount that may be due him for such feeding, herding or pasturing, and is authorized to retain possession of such animals until such amount is paid.

Jackson v. Mateus

Summary: Plaintiff filed suit against the defendant after she was bitten by the defendant’s cat and required medical attention as a result of the bite. Plaintiff found the defendant’s cat on her property and mistakenly started petting the cat, thinking that it was one of her own cats. As plaintiff was petting the cat, it bit her causing her injury. Plaintiff filed a negligence claim against defendant for not restraining the cat. The court held in favor of the defendant because the court found that this incident was not foreseeable and because it was not foreseeable, the defendant did not owe a duty to restrain the animal under the common law, municipal law, or state law.

Plaintiff filed suit against the defendant after she was bitten by the defendant’s cat and required medical attention as a result of the bite. Plaintiff found the defendant’s cat on her property and mistakenly started petting the cat, thinking that it was one of her own cats. As plaintiff was petting the cat, it bit her causing her injury. Plaintiff filed a negligence claim against defendant for not restraining the cat. The court held in favor of the defendant because the court found that this incident was not foreseeable and because it was not foreseeable, the defendant did not owe a duty to restrain the animal under the common law, municipal law, or state law.

UT - Breed - § 18-2-101. Regulation of dogs by a municipality

Summary: This Utah law effective in 2015 prohibits a municipality from adopting breed-specific rule, regulation, policy, or ordinance regarding dogs. Any breed-specific rule, regulation, policy, or ordinance regarding dogs is void.

This Utah law effective in 2015 prohibits a municipality from adopting breed-specific rule, regulation, policy, or ordinance regarding dogs. Any breed-specific rule, regulation, policy, or ordinance regarding dogs is void.

Detailed Discussion of Utah Great Ape Laws

Summary: The following article discusses Great Ape law in Utah.Utah does not have a law dealing with great apes, but addresses use and possession through regulations issued under the authority of the state’s Wildlife Resources Code. Additionally, only some great apes are protected under Utah’s anti-cruelty laws. The law prohibits both affirmative acts of cruelty such as torture or unjustified killing, and the failure to provide necessary food, water, care, or shelter for an animal in the person's custody. Exceptions to the definition of “animal” exclude those animals owned or kept by a AZAA accredited zoological park or temporarily in the state as part of a circus or traveling exhibitor licensed by the USDA.

The following article discusses Great Ape law in Utah.Utah does not have a law dealing with great apes, but addresses use and possession through regulations issued under the authority of the state’s Wildlife Resources Code. Additionally, only some great apes are protected under Utah’s anti-cruelty laws. The law prohibits both affirmative acts of cruelty such as torture or unjustified killing, and the failure to provide necessary food, water, care, or shelter for an animal in the person's custody. Exceptions to the definition of “animal” exclude those animals owned or kept by a AZAA accredited zoological park or temporarily in the state as part of a circus or traveling exhibitor licensed by the USDA.

UT - Initiatives - Utah Supermajority for Hunting Initiatives, Proposition 5 (1998)

Summary: Proposition 5 amends present provisions of the Utah Constitution regarding the power of the people of the state to initiate legislation and submit it to a vote of the people for approval or rejection by majority vote. This proposition requires a two-thirds vote in order to adopt by initiative a state law allowing, limiting, or prohibiting the taking of wildlife or the season for or method of taking wildlife. The measures passed with 56.1% of the vote.

Proposition 5 amends present provisions of the Utah Constitution regarding the power of the people of the state to initiate legislation and submit it to a vote of the people for approval or rejection by majority vote. This proposition requires a two-thirds vote in order to adopt by initiative a state law allowing, limiting, or prohibiting the taking of wildlife or the season for or method of taking wildlife. The measures passed with 56.1% of the vote.

UT - Agriculture - Title 4 Utah Agriculture Code

Summary: The following statutes detail penalities for violating of the agricultural code. They also contain animal disease control provisions and detail the organization of the Department of Agriculture and Food.

The following statutes detail penalities for violating of the agricultural code. They also contain animal disease control provisions and detail the organization of the Department of Agriculture and Food.

UT- Animal Disease Control - R58. Animal Industry.

Summary: These are the regulations for Utah's Control of Animal Disease Act. The regulation states, "It is the intent of these rules to eliminate or reduce the spread of diseases among animals by providing standards to be met in the movement of animals within the State of Utah (INTRASTATE) and the importation of animals into the state (INTERSTATE)." Included in the rule are all import requirements for all major livestock species as well as dogs, cats, and ferrets. The rule also covers exotic animals, zoological animals, and wildlife (section 18).

These are the regulations for Utah's Control of Animal Disease Act. The regulation states, "It is the intent of these rules to eliminate or reduce the spread of diseases among animals by providing standards to be met in the movement of animals within the State of Utah (INTRASTATE) and the importation of animals into the state (INTERSTATE)." Included in the rule are all import requirements for all major livestock species as well as dogs, cats, and ferrets. The rule also covers exotic animals, zoological animals, and wildlife (section 18).

UT - Equine Activity Liability - Part 2. Limitations on Liability for Equine and Livestock Activities

Summary: This Utah section states that it is presumed that participants in equine or livestock activities are aware of and understand that there are inherent risks associated with these activities.  Thus, an equine activity sponsor, equine professional, livestock activity sponsor, or livestock professional is not liable for an injury to or the death of a participant due to the inherent risks associated with these activities.  The section also requires an equine professional to give notice to participants of the limitation of liability, either by the posting of a sign or by the execution of a written release.

This Utah section states that it is presumed that participants in equine or livestock activities are aware of and understand that there are inherent risks associated with these activities.  Thus, an equine activity sponsor, equine professional, livestock activity sponsor, or livestock professional is not liable for an injury to or the death of a participant due to the inherent risks associated with these activities.  The section also requires an equine professional to give notice to participants of the limitation of liability, either by the posting of a sign or by the execution of a written release.

UT - Impound - (Repealed) § 77-24-1.5. Safekeeping by officer pending disposition--Records required

Summary: §§ 77-24-1 to 77-24-5. Repealed by Laws 2013, c. 394, § 40, eff. July 1, 2013 (Formerly: this Utah statute, amended in 2011, states that each peace officer shall hold all "property" in safe custody until it is received into evidence or disposed of as provided in this chapter. He or she must also maintain a record that identifies it. Note that the provisions related to specifically to animal impoundment/euthanasia were removed.)

§§ 77-24-1 to 77-24-5. Repealed by Laws 2013, c. 394, § 40, eff. July 1, 2013 (Formerly: this Utah statute, amended in 2011, states that each peace officer shall hold all "property" in safe custody until it is received into evidence or disposed of as provided in this chapter. He or she must also maintain a record that identifies it. Note that the provisions related to specifically to animal impoundment/euthanasia were removed.)

UT - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Statutes

Summary: These Utah statutes comprise the state's anti-cruelty provisions.  "Animal" is defined as a live, nonhuman vertebrate creature, but animals raised for agricultural purposes and wildlife are excluded from the definition.  A person is guilty of cruelty to animals if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence fails to provide necessary food, care, or shelter for an animal in his custody, abandons an animal in the person's custody, transports or confines an animal in a cruel manner, injures an animal, or causes any animal to fight with another animal for amusement or gain.  Aggravated cruelty (i.e., torturing, poisoning, or intentionally killing an animal) and dogfighting incur stiffer penalties.

These Utah statutes comprise the state's anti-cruelty provisions.  "Animal" is defined as a live, nonhuman vertebrate creature, but animals raised for agricultural purposes and wildlife are excluded from the definition.  A person is guilty of cruelty to animals if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence fails to provide necessary food, care, or shelter for an animal in his custody, abandons an animal in the person's custody, transports or confines an animal in a cruel manner, injures an animal, or causes any animal to fight with another animal for amusement or gain.  Aggravated cruelty (i.e., torturing, poisoning, or intentionally killing an animal) and dogfighting incur stiffer penalties.

Share |