paw law
The 2017 Florida Legislative Update On Dog-Related Laws.
–by Dionne M. Blaesing, Esq.
One out of five bills of interest to dog people became law. I have listed the Fl. Legislative authors for the bills that failed or were with- drawn. Call the authors to support or criticize their efforts; there could be life for these matters in the future.
FL. ST. 92.51 - THE ONE THAT MADE IT: DOGS IN THE JUDICIARY SETTINGS SB 416, SJ 317 and CS/HB 157 amended Fl. St. 92.51. This statute provides for the use of “facility dogs” and therapy dogs to provide emotional support to persons under 18 years of age, dis- abled adults or victims of sexual offenses in court trials, depositions, or hearings whether appearing as a witness or party. The statute defines “facility dog” and adopts the standard definition for therapy dog. Neither a service dog or emotional support dog are included in the statute.
FL. ST. 316.2003 - ONE THAT DIED: DOGS IN PICKUP TRUCKS SB 320 and HB 627 proposed Fl. St. 316.2003. The bills required dogs in the back of open trucks or trailers to be secured by a container or safely tethered. Representative Moskowitz authored this house bill. The bill died in committee.
FL. ST 768.1392 - ANOTHER THAT DIED: OWNER RECOVERY FOR HARMED OR KILLED PET A host of bills in the House, Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate were proposed which either died in committee or were withdrawn. Not all bills addressed the topic similarly:
HB 497 authored by Representative Killbrew. Addressed financial recovery of treatment costs, fair market value of the pet and for owner’s emotional impact. It died.
HB 515 “Companion Animal Protection Act” authored by Representative B. Watson similarly died.
HB 1067 authored by Representative Moskowitz and Representative Geller; died also.
CS/SB 1270 authored by Senator Young and was approved unan- imously by the Senate Judiciary Committee. For an owner whose pet is injured or killed by the negligence of another, the bill sought
78 THE NEW BARKER
to allow for financial recovery for costs of treatment, for the fair market value of the pet and for the emotional suffering of the owner, the latter to be capped at $5,000.00. This bill died in committee.
Note:The concept of paying an owner com- pensation for her/his emotional impact caused by death of a pet is contrary to a long history of Florida law which considers a pet personal property. The Courts have determined that the death of the pet has to be witnessed and endured by the owner or the injury or death must be the result of gross and overt negli- gence or malpractice, otherwise financial recovery for the owner trauma is unavailable.
SB 690 called the Florida Animal Recovery Act, was to be Fl. St. 768.1392. Senator Baxley authored the bill. This bill allowed for recovery of economic damages such as the reasonable and necessary veterinary costs and the fair
market value of the pet but specifically rejected what it defined as non-economic damages which included the emotional suffering of the owner. This bill stands opposed to the primary purpose of the other related bills. This bill was withdrawn by the authors.
HB 113 Racing Greyhounds - withdrawn The bill was introduced by Representative A. Miller and provided that a positive test for anabolic steroids created a violation. The bill was withdrawn.
SB 212 Animal Hoarding Prohibited - died The bill authored by a Senator Steube sought to prohibit animal hoarding. It sought to negate any local ordinances and rules that had language contrary to the bill and enjoined any future attempt to negate the bill’s language or intent by local authority. Died.
U
Dionne M. Blaesing, PA practice areas include animal law and veterinary malpractice. She has a 20-year background in veterinary science, served as an emergency technician at the SPCA Angell Memorial Animal Hospital in Boston, was Chief of Nursing for Boston Zoological Society/MDC Zoo, managed a Pasco County veterinary hospital, and served as a Board Member and President of the Suncoast SPCA for 10 years. Dionne may be reached at 727.992.9114.
DionneBlaesing.com
www.TheNewBarker.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
