Leashing the Loth-cat

By

-

December 5, 2019

In the meme-rich Episode 4 of The Mandalorian, a cranky Loth-cat menaces Baby Yoda while the protagonists are trying to blend in with the locals on the planet of Sorgan. This alarming little confrontation raises some legal questions about bringing a pet along when visiting the friendly neighborhood public house.

Animals in a food facility

First off, the Loth-cat’s presence in the public house’s dining area is of concern. Generally, state and local regulations of food safety forbid animals in restaurants. See, e.g., Cal. Health & Safety Code § 114259.5(a); N.Y.C., N.Y., Health Code § 81.25.

Despite this general rule, a number of states, including Florida, New York, Illinois, and California, have in recent years passed statutes that allow restaurants to serve patrons with dogs in outdoor seating areas. But the restaurant seating in The Mandalorian seems like it’s inside a structure, albeit a relatively open-air one. In any event, those laws are dog-specific, so an intergalactic cat could not benefit from these al fresco exceptions.

Notably, the Americans with Disabilities Act requires public accommodations like restaurants to allow patrons with disabilities to dine with their qualified service animal. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii); 28 C.F.R. § 36.302(c). However, the ADA regulations define a service animal as a dog (or a miniature horse) and exclude all other creatures, including those of a feline variety. 28 C.F.R. § 36.104 (definition of “Service Animal”). An ill-tempered Loth-cat certainly would not qualify as a trained service animal that is entitled by the ADA to be in a restaurant.

Leash requirements for animals in public

But even assuming that the Loth-cat’s presence in a restaurant was not unlawful, the Loth-cat is apparently unrestrained and untethered. Is the owner of this grouchy Loth-cat required to keep it on a leash?

As an initial observation, leash laws tend to focus only on dogs. Two states, Michigan and Pennsylvania, require that owners maintain control of dogs while outside the home. Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 287.262 (making it unlawful for owner to allow a dog “to stray unless held properly in leash”); 3 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 459-305 (requiring that dogs be “under the reasonable control of some person”). Beyond that, states broadly regulate dogs that roam “at large” and allow the authorities to capture stray canines. Otherwise, dog leash laws are creatures of local regulation. See, e.g., N.Y.C., N.Y., Health Code § 161.05(a); Chi., Ill., Municipal Code § 7-12-030.

Also, many states and cities impose leashing, muzzling, and other requirements on dogs that have been adjudicated as dangerous or vicious. While the Loth-cat certainly snapped and growled at the Child, it’s not clear that the Loth-cat qualifies as a dangerous animal, and again: not a dog.

When it comes to our feline friends, some municipalities require cats to be on leashes when outside the home. See, e.g., Dallas, Tex., Code of Ordinances § 7-3.1(a)(4); Englewood, Colo., Municipal Code § 7-1A-3; St. Louis, Mo., Ordinances § 10.04.225; S.F., Cal., Park Code § 5.03 (requiring cats to be leashed or crated only while in San Francisco city parks). But given the difficulty of catching unleashed cats, cat leash laws can be controversial and their efficacy questionable. And given that The Mandalorian takes place in the lawless times after the Empire has collapsed, it seems unlikely that the rural world of Sorgan regards cat leashing as a legislative priority.

Of course, even if there were no leash requirements for Loth-cats on Sorgan, the owner would have been liable for negligence if—God forbid—the Loth-cat had injured Baby Yoda. Thankfully, Baby Yoda seemed unscathed, but Loth-cats turn up all over the galaxy far, far away with nary a leash, crate, or registration tag in sight. After Baby Yoda’s brush with the surly Loth-cat in Episode 4, perhaps he will use his celebrity platform to persuade his local representatives to finally enact some much-needed Loth-cat regulations.

Can Cassie Lang Have a Giant Ant as an Exotic Pet?

By

Josh Gilliland

-

July 27, 2015

0

Cassie Lang has a very special pet at the end of Ant-Man: An ant that is larger than a Rough Collie. Would she be legally able to have such an exotic pet in San Francisco?

The state of California and cities have very specific rules on the kinds of animals that can be pets. California prohibits a long list of animals from being imported, possessed, or released live in the state without a revocable, nontransferable permit, including any animal from Manatees to all species of Crocodilidae. Cal Fish & G Code § 2118. This list does not include any inspects.

The City and County of San Francisco prohibit animal owners from letting animals run at large around the city, other than domestic cats. San Francisco Health Code section 41.12. It is illegal to sell wild or dangerous animals in San Francisco, which are defined as animals that are “wild by nature and not customarily domesticated in the City and County of San Francisco and which, because of its size…that could constitute a danger to human life.” San Francisco Health Code section 51. These animals include wolves, jaguar, elephant, orangutan, Gila monster, and others, to name a few. Id. Moreover, wild animals must have a permit, or be taken by animal control up to 14 days before being sold or destroyed. San Francisco Health Code section 65.

San Francisco’s laws do not specifically address insects. By way of comparison, Alameda pet restrictions include insects. Alameda, California Code of Ordinances Sec. 7-9.6.

Pet ordinances are not designed for insects to be artificially enlarged. The City and County of San Francisco would likely require a license for a giant ant based on its “size” as a wild animal that could pose a danger to a person.

There is not a rich body of law for “ant farm” liability. At common law, an owner of a wild animal is absolutely liable for any injuries caused by that animal. By way of comparison, owners of domesticated such as dogs or cats are not subject to liability under common law unless the owner knew the animal was abnormally dangerous. Drake v. Dean (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 915, 935. However, California statute states that dog owners are liable for damages if a dog bites someone if the victim is in a place where they can lawfully be, regardless of knowledge of whether or not the dog is vicious. Cal Civ Code § 3342.

Would the same be true of a giant pet ant? Most likely yes, given the exotic nature of the pet and an active plaintiff’s bar if the ant bites anyone. Moreover, ants can lift 1000% their weight. As such, “Antie” should be able to overturn cars, rip doors off hinges, and cause general mayhem on a rampage. However, it seems highly unlikely Cassie would employ her pet ant to terrorize first graders. That being said, it is a good thing Cassie has a police officer as a soon-to-be step-father to help with the permitting process.

Ragtag Legal Lessons from Agents of SHIELD

By

Josh Gilliland

-

May 7, 2014

0

Agents of SHIELD is drawing to an excellent season finale. Here are legal issues from Ragtag.

Doing the Right Thing vs Vigilantes

Agent Fitz admitted the operations the Agents are carrying out makes them vigilantes. Agent Coulson countered he called it “doing the right thing.” The “doing the right thing” has been the core of the posts Vigilantes of SHIELD and Flying Lola in the Face of Orders. More importantly, Coulson’s motivation to “be the shield” has been an excellent moral justification for being of SHIELD.

Agent Coulson and his team are breaking the law, but they have a very strong “necessity defense,” because they are trying to stop greater crimes from happening. Moreover, there is no other course of action for them to take. Additionally, they have broken multiple laws in conducting law enforcement activities, but they have not taken the lives of anyone in law enforcement, the military or civilians. That still shows they are acting in the nation’s best interests and not outright committing treason.

Who is Cybertek’s Records Information Management Officer?

Cybertek would throw the Silicon Valley world of electronically stored information on its head by only maintaining paper records and not having any electronic data.

For all of the attorneys who wish to avoid text messages, social media and email in litigation, Cybertek is the right client for you.

Just be highly skilled at defending charges ranging from treason to unlawful human medical experimentation.

There are over 14,000 records retention laws in the United States. Knowing which ones apply to a company is how general counsel earn their paychecks. Companies struggle with data managements, archiving, and preserving data they are legally required to maintain under the law or for business reasons.

That being said, Cybertek is not an anomaly for having paper documents going back to 1990. There are technology companies in Silicon Valley that have paper documents from the 1980s appearing in patent cases. That is not abnormal. What is highly strange would be a tech company in Palo Alto without computers.

Can We Get Haircuts in Cuba?

Cuba has the distinction of making Theodore Roosevelt a hero, a rare Presidential trip and speech by Calvin Coolidge, the Bay of Pigs, and being ground zero for almost starting World War III in 1962. For many foreign policy reasons, Cuba has been embargoed in a grudge match with the United States.

It would be very difficult for our heroes from SHIELD to drop in on Cuba for a day trip, without the risk of war. Moreover, a secret HYDRA base under a barber shop would not help Cuba’s relations with the United States.

Travel to Cuba is highly regulated for specific reasons. Tourist travel is prohibited. 31 CFR 515.560(F). General and specific travel licenses can be granted to those subject to US jurisdiction to Cuba for the following activities:

(1) Family visits (general and specific licenses) (See § 515.561);
(2) Official business of the U.S. government, foreign governments, and certain intergovernmental organizations (general license) (see § 515.562);
(3) Journalistic activity (general and specific licenses) (see § 515.563);
(4) Professional research and professional meetings (general and specific licenses) (See § 515.564);
(5) Educational activities (general and specific licenses) (See § 515.565);
(6) Religious activities (general and specific licenses) (See § 515.566);
(7) Public performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and exhibitions (specific licenses) (See § 515.567);
(8) Support for the Cuban people (specific licenses) (see § 515.574);
(9) Humanitarian projects (specific licenses) (see § 515.575);

31 CFR 515.560.

Agent Coulson and his team’s travel to Cuba would violate US law, as they could not apply for a license, and also Cuba’s rights as a nation. Most countries do not approve of rogue former spies doing the “right thing” in a paramilitary operation.

It also should be noted, getting a haircut and shave is not on the list.

In the unlikely event Agent Coulson and his fellow agents coordinated with the Cuban government, they would likely violate the Logan Act. This law prohibits US citizens effectively having their own foreign policy agreements with the “intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government” that are “in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States.” 18 USCS § 953. Given the nature of the relations with Cuba, and the likely negative reaction from the US with HYDRA launching operations from Cuba into the United States, the Logan Act might be violated if Coulson coordinated with Cuba. However, this seems highly unlikely.

Don’t Make Me Go Old Yeller

Garrett should not be allowed around children. Or Dogs.

There is no question that John Garrett “liberating” Grant Ward from juvenile hall would have been child abduction. Massachusetts law states:

Whoever, without lawful authority, forcibly or secretly confines or imprisons a child under the age of 16 within the commonwealth against his will or forcibly carries or sends such person out of the commonwealth or forcibly seizes and confines or inveigles or kidnaps a child under the age of 16 with the intent either to cause him to be secretly confined or imprisoned in the commonwealth against his will or to cause him to be sent out of the commonwealth against his will or in any way held to service against his will, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 15 years. The provisions of the preceding sentence shall not apply to the parent of a child under 16 years of age who takes custody of such child.

ALM GL ch. 265, § 26.

Garrett arguably meets this offense, because HYDRA agents forcibly broke Ward out of juvenile hall and left Ward in the woods to fend for himself. While Ward did agree to go with Garrett, that did not also include “troops are about attack.” Moreover, leaving a minor in the woods to care for themselves would be child abuse and abandonment.

Ordering Ward to kill Buddy the Dog would violate Wyoming law, which defines animal abuse, in part, as “unnecessarily… attempts to kill an animal.” Wyo. Stat. § 6-3-203(a)(ii).

Forcing Ward to kill Buddy would go far beyond Old Yeller, where our boy hero had to shoot his beloved dog infected with rabies.

Buddy’s only reason to be put down was making Ward weak by emotional attachment. If the young Ward had executed Buddy, he would have committed a crime.

And Garrett is a supreme jerk.

Too bad Ward did not feel the same loyalty to all the SHIELD Agents he killed.

It is eerie that it looked like Ward was going to kill Fitz and Simmons like Old Yeller. Instead of being in a shed, Fitz and Simmons were in a cargo pod as Ward wrestled with his feelings. However, Fitz’s puppy dog loyalty to Ward seems to have been rewarded by being dumped at sea from a survivable altitude and speed, opposed to executed like Old Yeller in a shed.

An EMP As a Weapon

Fitz might not understand how to do a fist bump, but he knew how to ruin a cyborg’s day with an electromagnetic pulse.

Was using the EMP a valid form of self-defense? Maybe. Garrett wanted Fitz and Simmons dead. While a gun was not to his head, stopping Garrett was more a tactical move to eliminate an enemy.

A Woman's Best Friend

By

Jessica_alegalgeek

-

March 22, 2013

0

I had to say goodbye to Tiga, my darling dog, last week. She was fourteen years old and had been by my side almost her entire life and I miss her terribly. When we got her she was covered in fleas and ticks, had hookworms and an upper respiratory infection, and was skin and bones. We fed her, loved her, and fixed her up and in return she was the most devoted, loving, protective, loveliest friend a girl could have. And even though I know I was lucky to have her by my side for so long, it’s still hard to start and end each day without seeing her sweet face.

So, in honor of my adorable pooch, I wanted to dedicate this week’s post to the pets of some of my favorite science fiction and comic book heroes…

There aren’t a lot of pets in science fiction and superhero stories, although there are a few prominent ones that come to mind. My favorite is Woola, the Martian “dog” that John Carter befriends shortly after landing on Mars. Robert Heinlein incorporated pets into some of his sci fi books, including a cool snake in Stranger in a Strange Land and the titular cat from The Cat Who Walks Through Walls (his second best book, in my opinion, after The Moon is a Harsh Mistress).

In Star Wars, my favorite pet has to be the annoying creature, Crumb, that Jabba keeps as a pet (or court jester), who reminds me of a cross between a chihuahua, a monkey, and a crow (I had a pet crow once – it was awesome). Of course, the rancor that ate the dancer in Return of the Jedi was also apparently Jabba’s pet, but he’s not cute or funny.

As a child, Spock had a popular Vulcan pet named I-Chaya, a six-legged carnivore known as a sehlat. And, of course, it’s thanks to Star Trek that we have the adorable but dangerously fruitful Tribble.

Through the years Superman’s had a loyal friend in Krypto. Krypto was also from Krypton and, therefore, once he reached Earth, he had powers similar to that of Superman.

Finally, it being science fiction, the pets are sometimes robots. Most notably, in Dr. Who there is frequently a robot dog named K-9. And K-9 can actually shoot lasers out of his nose, which is pretty freakin’ cool.

So pets are important, not just to me and millions of other humans, but even to space and time travelers. How does the law protect our pets?

Caring for pets: Everyone’s heard the story about the millionaire who dies and leaves their fortune to their beloved pet. It happens often and courts will allow it. Generally, of course, pets are considered property so it’s difficult to leave money directly to the pet. Instead, the will can establish a caretaker for the pet and leave money to that person for care of the pet. Another option, however, that’s available in most states is to actually create a trust for the pet.

Hurting pets: A few years ago, people were horrified by a man, consumed with road rage, who tore a woman’s dog out of her lap and threw the dog onto a busy freeway, killing the dog. In that case, the man was charged with animal abuse and faced years in prison. Pets are still property, so claims for property damage are also possible, although many courts have recognized that a pet’s value is more than what would ordinarily attach to property. As a result, pet owners have been allowed to recover costs representing medical costs and the intrinsic value of the pet.

Suffering the loss of a pet: Several years ago the Washington Court of Appeals decided that a pet owner could recover emotional distress damages for malicious injuries to their pets. The New Jersey Supreme Court, on the other hand, recently rejected an attempt to create a new cause of action for emotional distress for witnessing the death of a pet. McDougall v. Lamm, 211 N.J. 203, 227, 48 A.3d 312, 326 (N.J. 2012). In doing so, it noted that most courts have rejected such attempts because of concerns about opening the door for other types of personal property losses, the difficulty of determining who could recover and for what types of animals, and the challenges in evaluating damages for such a subjective loss.

Losing a pet is never easy, and sometimes can be incredibly difficult. I’m not ready to turn in living, breathing, furry pets for a robot companion just yet, but the pain of saying goodbye to a dear friend makes me understand the appeal of a robot pet.