DOCSLIB.ORG

COURT of APPEALS of the STATE of NEW YORK ------X in the Matter of a Proceeding Under Article 70 of the CPLR for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COURT of APPEALS of the STATE of NEW YORK ------X in the Matter of a Proceeding Under Article 70 of the CPLR for a Writ of Habeas Corpus COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------x In the Matter of a Proceeding under Article 70 of the CPLR for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, THE NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT, INC., on Index Nos. 162358/15 behalf of TOMMY, (New York County); Petitioner-Appellant, 150149/16 (New York -against- County) PATRICK C. LAVERY, individually and as an of Circle L Trailer Sales, Inc., DIANE LAVERY, and CIRCLE L TRAILER SALES, INC., Respondents-Respondents, THE NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT, INC., on behalf of KIKO, Petitioner-Appellant, -against- CARMEN PRESTI, individually and as an officer and director of The Primate Sanctuary, Inc., CHRISTIE E. PRESTI, individually and as an officer and director of The Primate Sanctuary, Inc., and THE PRIMATE SANCTUARY, INC., Respondents-Respondents. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------x MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEALS Elizabeth Stein, Esq. Steven M. Wise, Esq. 5 Dunhill Road (of the Bar of the State of New Hyde Park, New York Massachusetts) 11040 By Permission of the Court (516) 747-4726 5195 NW 112th Terrace [email protected] Coral Springs, Florida 33076 (954) 648-9864 [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Authorities ................................................................................... iv Argument .................................................................................................... 1 I. Preliminary Statement ............................................................... 1 II. Statement of the Issues .............................................................. 3 III. Standard of Review ..................................................................... 4 IV. The novel and important questions raised in this appeal require review by the Court of Appeals ......................... 5 A. This case presents novel and important issues of law of statewide, national, and international significance .......................................................................... 5 B. The question of who is a “person,” and the extent to which “personhood” might be limited by one’s capacity to bear duties and responsibilities, is perhaps the most important question that could come before a court ........................... 13 C. The complex questions of law and fact raised in this appeal require review by the Court of Appeals ............................................................................... 24 V. The Decision requires review by the Court of Appeals to resolve the conflicts it creates with CPLR Article 70 as interpreted by New York Courts ............. 26 A. The legality of Tommy’s and Kiko’s detention has never been determined by a court of New York State in any proceeding and the ends of justice will only be served by issuing the orders to show cause ..................................................................... 28 ii B. The second petitions presented grounds not previously presented and determined .............................. 32 VI. The Decision conflicts with this Court’s decisions, the decisions of the First Department, and the decisions of other Appellate Departments .............................. 39 A. The First Department’s Decision conflicts with this Court’s ruling in Byrn v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corporation, 31 N.Y.2d 194 (1972) ........................................................................... 40 B. The First Department’s statement that the determination of who is a “person” under the common law is better suited to the legislature, and that CPLR Article 70 codified the common law of habeas corpus, conflicts with precedent of this Court and the First and Second Departments ...................................................................... 47 1. The common law writ of habeas corpus has not been codified by legislation .................................. 47 2. New York courts have a duty to reevaluate the common law classification of all nonhuman animals as things for the purposes of the common law writ of habeas corpus, and cannot merely defer to the legislature ................................................................... 50 C. The Decision’s holding that habeas corpus is limited to unconditional release conflicts with decades of Court of Appeals and Appellate Department precedent ..................................................... 54 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 62 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Affronti v. Crosson, 95 N.Y.2d 713 (2001), cert. den., 534 U.S. 826 (2001) .................. 22, 37 Allen v. New York State Div. of Parole, 252 A.D.2d 691 (3d Dept. 1998) ........................................................... 31 Application of Mitchell,, 421 N.Y.S.2d 443, 444 (4th Dept. 1979) ................................................................................... 61 Bing v. Thunig, 2 N.Y.2d 656 (1957) .............................................................................. 53 Board of Educ. of Monroe-Woodbury Cent. School Dist. v. Wieder, 72 N.Y.2d 174 (1988) ............................................................................ 23 Brevorka ex rel. Wittle v. Schuse, 227 A.D.2d 969 (4th Dept. 1996) ......................................................... 55 Brown v. Muniz, 61 A.D.3d 526 (1st Dept. 2009) ............................................................ 39 Byrn v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corp., 31 N.Y. 2d 194 (1972) ................................................................... passim Caceci v. Do Canto, Const. Corp., 72 N.Y.2d 52 (1988) .............................................................................. 52 Callan v. Callan, 494 N.Y.S.2d 32 (2d Dept. 1985) ......................................................... 61 Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) ................................................................................ 21 Flanagan v. Mount Eden General Hospital, 24 N.Y. 2d 427 (1969) ........................................................................... 51 iv Forbes v. Cochran, 107, Eng. Rep. 450, 467 (K.B. 1824) .................................................... 46 Gallagher v. St. Raymond’s R.C. Church, 21 N.Y.2d 554 (1968) ............................................................................ 52 Gilman v. McCardle, 65 How. Pr. 330 (N.Y. Super. 1883), rev. on other grounds, 99 N.Y. 451 (1885) ................................................................................ 46 Greenburg v. Lorenz, 9 N.Y. 2d 195 (1961) ............................................................................. 53 Griffin v. Marquardt, 17 N.Y. 28 (1858) .................................................................................... 4 Guice v. Charles Schwab & Co., 89 N.Y.2d 31 (1996) .......................................................................... 5, 39 Hamilton v. Miller, 23 N.Y.3d 592 (2014) ............................................................................ 24 Hoff v. State of New York, 279 N.Y. 490 (1939) .............................................................................. 49 Hurlburt v. Hurlburt, 128 N.Y. 420 (1891) ................................................................................ 4 In re Belt, 2 Edm. Sel. Cas. 93 (Sup. Ct. 1848) .................................................... 46 In re Cecelia, Third Court of Guarantees, Mendoza, Argentina, File No. P-72.254/15 at 22-23 ............................................................................ 13 In re Cecilia, File No. P-72.254/15 ............................................................................. 45 In re Fouts, 677 N.Y.S.2d 699 (Sur. 1998) .............................................................. 46 v In re Goodell, 39 Wis. 232 (1875) ................................................................................ 21 In re Henry, 1865 WL 3392 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1865) .................................................... 61 In re Hong Yen Chang, 60 Cal. 4th 1169 (Cal. 2015) ................................................................ 21 In re Kirk, 1 Edm. Sel. Cas. 315 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1846) .......................................... 46 In re Mickel, 14 Johns. 324 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1817) ..................................................... 42 In re Shannon B., 70 N.Y.2d 458 (1987) .............................................................................. 5 In re Storar, 52 N.Y.2d 363 (1981), cert. den., 454 U.S. 858 (1981) ........................ 22 In re Tom, 5 Johns. 365 (N.Y. 1810) ...................................................................... 46 Jarman v. Patterson, 23 Ky. 644 (1828) ................................................................................. 42 Lemmon v. People, 20 N.Y. 562 (1860) .................................................................... 17, 46, 55 Lenzner v. Falk, 68 N.Y.S.2d 699 (Sup. Ct. 1947) .......................................................... 46 Lewis v. Burger King, 344 Fed. Appx. 470 [10th Cir 2009], cert. denied, 558 U.S. 1125 [2010] ................................................................ 50, 53, 54 Lunney v. Prodigy Servs. Co., 94 N.Y.2d 242 (1999) ............................................................................ 24 Matter of Ferrara, 2006 NY Slip Op 5156, 7 N.Y.3d 244 (2006) ......................................... 4 vi Matter of George L., 85 N.Y.2d 295 (1995) ...........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nonhuman Rights to Personhood
    Pace Environmental Law Review Volume 30 Issue 3 Summer 2013 Article 10 July 2013 Nonhuman Rights to Personhood Steven M. Wise Nonhuman Rights Project Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr Part of the Animal Law Commons, and the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation Steven M. Wise, Nonhuman Rights to Personhood, 30 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 1278 (2013) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol30/iss3/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Environmental Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DYSON LECTURE Nonhuman Rights to Personhood STEVEN M. WISE I. INTRODUCTION Thank you all for joining us for the second Dyson Lecture of 2012. We were very lucky to have a first Dyson Lecture, and we will have an even more successful lecture this time. We have a very distinguished person I will talk about in just a second. I’m David Cassuto, a Pace Law School professor. I teach among other things, Animal Law, and that is why I am very familiar with Professor Wise’s work. I want to say a few words about the Dyson Lecture. The Dyson Distinguished Lecture was endowed in 1982 by a gift from the Dyson Foundation, which was made possible through the generosity of the late Charles Dyson, a 1930 graduate, trustee, and long-time benefactor of Pace University. The principle aim of the Dyson Lecture is to encourage and make possible scholarly legal contributions of high quality in furtherance of Pace Law School’s educational mission and that is very much what we are going to have today.
    [Show full text]
  • ASEBL Journal
    January 2019 Volume 14, Issue 1 ASEBL Journal Association for the Study of EDITOR (Ethical Behavior)•(Evolutionary Biology) in Literature St. Francis College, Brooklyn Heights, N.Y. Gregory F. Tague, Ph.D. ▬ ~ GUEST CO-EDITOR ISSUE ON GREAT APE PERSONHOOD Christine Webb, Ph.D. ~ (To Navigate to Articles, Click on Author’s Last Name) EDITORIAL BOARD — Divya Bhatnagar, Ph.D. FROM THE EDITORS, pg. 2 Kristy Biolsi, Ph.D. ACADEMIC ESSAY Alison Dell, Ph.D. † Shawn Thompson, “Supporting Ape Rights: Tom Dolack, Ph.D Finding the Right Fit Between Science and the Law.” pg. 3 Wendy Galgan, Ph.D. COMMENTS Joe Keener, Ph.D. † Gary L. Shapiro, pg. 25 † Nicolas Delon, pg. 26 Eric Luttrell, Ph.D. † Elise Huchard, pg. 30 † Zipporah Weisberg, pg. 33 Riza Öztürk, Ph.D. † Carlo Alvaro, pg. 36 Eric Platt, Ph.D. † Peter Woodford, pg. 38 † Dustin Hellberg, pg. 41 Anja Müller-Wood, Ph.D. † Jennifer Vonk, pg. 43 † Edwin J.C. van Leeuwen and Lysanne Snijders, pg. 46 SCIENCE CONSULTANT † Leif Cocks, pg. 48 Kathleen A. Nolan, Ph.D. † RESPONSE to Comments by Shawn Thompson, pg. 48 EDITORIAL INTERN Angelica Schell † Contributor Biographies, pg. 54 Although this is an open-access journal where papers and articles are freely disseminated across the internet for personal or academic use, the rights of individual authors as well as those of the journal and its editors are none- theless asserted: no part of the journal can be used for commercial purposes whatsoever without the express written consent of the editor. Cite as: ASEBL Journal ASEBL Journal Copyright©2019 E-ISSN: 1944-401X [email protected] www.asebl.blogspot.com Member, Council of Editors of Learned Journals ASEBL Journal – Volume 14 Issue 1, January 2019 From the Editors Shawn Thompson is the first to admit that he is not a scientist, and his essay does not pretend to be a scientific paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Rattling the Cage Defended Steven M
    Boston College Law Review Volume 43 Article 2 Issue 3 Number 3 5-1-2002 Rattling the Cage Defended Steven M. Wise Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr Part of the Animal Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Steven M. Wise, Rattling the Cage Defended, 43 B.C.L. Rev. 623 (2002), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol43/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RATTLING THE CAGE DEFENDED STEVEN M. WISE* Abstract: In Rattling the Cage: Toward Levi Rights for Animals, the author advocated basic legal rights—specifically common law rights—for chimpanzees, bonobos, and other nonhuman animals. In this Article, the author responds to many of the major criticisms of Rattling the Cage. The author confronts critics of his historical arguments for legal rights for nonhuman animals, tracing those arguments through ancient philosophy and nineteenth century English statutes. The author also expands upon his legal arguments for animal rights, reexamining various theories of rights and justifications for treating animals as property, Finally, borrowing from his upcoming book Drawing the Line: Science and The Case for Animal Rights, the author defends his advocacy of legal rights for nonhuman animals based on the relative autonomy nonhuman animals possess. INTRODUCTION "The 'animal rights' movement is gathering steam and Steven Wise is one of the pistons."l Thus Judge Richard Posner began a Yale Law Journal review of my book, Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals, published in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Personhood for Animals and the Intersectionality of the Civil & Animal Rights Movements
    Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality Volume 4 Issue 2 Article 5 2016 Free Tilly?: Legal Personhood for Animals and the Intersectionality of the Civil & Animal Rights Movements Becky Boyle Indiana University Maurer School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijlse Part of the Law Commons Publication Citation Becky Boyle, Free Tilly?: Legal Personhood for Animals and the Intersectionality of the Civil & Animal Rights Movements, 4 Ind. J. L. & Soc. Equality 169 (2016). This Student Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality Volume 4, Issue 2 FREE TILLY?: LEGAL PERSONHOOD FOR ANIMALS AND THE INTERSECTIONALITY OF THE CIVIL & ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS BECKY BOYLE INTRODUCTION In February 2012, the District Court for the Southern District of California heard Tilikum v. Sea World, a landmark case for animal legal defense.1 The organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) filed a suit as next friends2 of five orca whales demanding their freedom from the marine wildlife entertainment park known as SeaWorld.3 The plaintiffs—Tilikum, Katina, Corky, Kasatka, and Ulises—were wild born and captured to perform at SeaWorld’s Shamu Stadium.4 They sought declaratory and injunctive relief for being held by SeaWorld in violation of slavery and involuntary servitude provisions of the Thirteenth Amendment.5 It was the first court in U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 21, No. 2 Fall 2010 ______
    INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS NEWSLETTER _____________________________________________________ Volume 21, No. 2 Fall 2010 _____________________________________________________ GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS ISEE Membership: ISEE membership dues are now due annually by Earth Day—22 April—of each year. Please pay your 2010-2011 dues now if you have not already done so. You can either use the form on the last page of this Newsletter to mail a check to ISEE Treasurer Marion Hourdequin, or you can use PayPal with a credit card from the membership page of the ISEE website at: <http://www.cep.unt.edu/iseememb.html>. “Old World and New World Perspectives on Environmental Philosophy,” Eighth Annual Meeting of the International Society for Environmental Ethics (ISEE), Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 14-17 June 2011: Please see the full call for abstracts and conference details in the section CONFERENCES AND CALLS below. Abstracts are due by 6 December 2010. ISEE Newsletter Going Exclusively Electronic: Starting with the Spring 2011 issue (Volume 22, no. 1), hardcopies of the ISEE Newsletter will no longer be produced and mailed to ISEE members via snail mail. ISEE members will continue to receive the Newsletter electronically as a pdf and, of course, can print their own hardcopies. New ISEE Newsletter Editor: Starting with the Spring 2011 issue, the new ISEE Newsletter Editor will be William Grove-Fanning. Please submit all ISEE Newsletter items to him at: <[email protected]>. Welcome William! ISEE Newsletter Issues: There was no 2010 Spring/Summer issue of the ISEE Newsletter. Because of the ISEE Newsletter Editor transition from Mark Woods to William Grove-Fanning, there will be no Winter 2011 issue of the ISEE Newsletter.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Animal & Natural Resource
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL & NATURAL RESOURCE LAW Michigan State University College of Law MAY 2018 VOLUME XIV The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law is published annually by law students at Michigan State University College of Law. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL & The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law received generous support from NATURAL RESOURCE LAW the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Michigan State University College of Law. Without their generous support, the Journal would not have been able to publish and VOL. XIV 2018 host its annual symposium. The Journal also is funded by subscription revenues. Subscription requests and article submissions may be sent to: Professor David Favre, Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law, Michigan State University College of EDITORIAL BOARD Law, 368 Law College Building, East Lansing MI 48824, or by email to msujanrl@ gmail.com. 2017-2018 Current yearly subscription rates are $27.00 in the U.S. and current yearly Internet Editor-in-Chief subscription rates are $27.00. Subscriptions are renewed automatically unless a request AYLOR ATERS for discontinuance is received. T W Back issues may be obtained from: William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285 Main Street, Executive Editor & Notes Editor Buffalo, NY 14209. JENNIFER SMITH The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law welcomes the submission of articles, book reviews, and notes & comments. Each manuscript must be double spaced, in Managing Editor & Business Editor 12 point, Times New Roman; footnotes must be single spaced, 10 point, Times New INDSAY EISS Roman. Submissions should be sent to [email protected] using Microsoft Word or L W PDF format.
    [Show full text]
  • The Moral Standing of Animals: Towards a Psychology of Speciesism
    The Moral Standing of Animals: Towards a Psychology of Speciesism Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Lucius Caviola, Jim A.C. Everett, and Nadira S. Faber University of Oxford We introduce and investigate the philosophical concept of ‘speciesism’ — the assignment of different moral worth based on species membership — as a psychological construct. In five studies, using both general population samples online and student samples, we show that speciesism is a measurable, stable construct with high interpersonal differences, that goes along with a cluster of other forms of prejudice, and is able to predict real-world decision- making and behavior. In Study 1 we present the development and empirical validation of a theoretically driven Speciesism Scale, which captures individual differences in speciesist attitudes. In Study 2, we show high test-retest reliability of the scale over a period of four weeks, suggesting that speciesism is stable over time. In Study 3, we present positive correlations between speciesism and prejudicial attitudes such as racism, sexism, homophobia, along with ideological constructs associated with prejudice such as social dominance orientation, system justification, and right-wing authoritarianism. These results suggest that similar mechanisms might underlie both speciesism and other well-researched forms of prejudice. Finally, in Studies 4 and 5, we demonstrate that speciesism is able to predict prosociality towards animals (both in the context of charitable donations and time investment) and behavioral food choices above and beyond existing related constructs. Importantly, our studies show that people morally value individuals of certain species less than others even when beliefs about intelligence and sentience are accounted for.
    [Show full text]
  • ([Ourt APPELLATE DIVISION - FIRST DEPARTMENT
    New York County Clerk's Index No. 162358/15 J!lebJ ~ork ~upreme ([ourt APPELLATE DIVISION - FIRST DEPARTMENT In the Matter of a Proceeding under Article 70 of the CPLR for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, THE NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT, INC., on behalf of TOMMY, Petitioner-Appellant, against PATRICK LAVERY, individually and as an officer and director of Circle L Trailer Sales, Inc., DIANE LAVERY, and CIRCLE L TRAILER SALES, INC., Respondents. BRIEF OF JUSTIN MARCEAU AND SAMUEL R. WISEMAN, HABEAS SCHOLARS AS AMICI CURIAE Justin Marceau PROFESSOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND CRIMINAL LAW UNIVERSITY OF DENVER STURM COLLEGE OF LAW* 2255 East Evans Avenue Denver, Colorado 80208 617-256-9073 [email protected] and Samuel R. Wiseman PROFESSOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND CRIMINAL LAW FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAw* 425 West Jefferson Street Tallahassee, Florida 32306 850-646-0093 [email protected] * Not admitted in New York. Affiliation notedfor identification purposes only. Printed on Recycled Paper TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES iii INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 2 ARGUMENT 5 I. THE WRIT HABEAS CORPUS HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN USED IN NOVEL SITUATIONS TO BRING ABOUT SOCIAL CHANGE 5 A. Family Law 5 B. Slavery 6 C. Guantanamo Bay 7 II. APPLYING HABEAS CORPUS TO NONHUMAN ANIMALS, LIKE TOMMY, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WRIT'S HISTORICAL USES 9 III. TOMMY SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A LEGAL PERSON AND ENTITLED TO HABEAS CORPUS I0 A. Captive Nonhuman Animals are Intelligent and Experience Suffering , 11 B. Exonerations and Notions ofInnocence are Equally Applicable to Humans and Nonhumans 12 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Minding Animals Bulletin 36
    Minding Animals Bulletin 36 Membership of Minding Animals International Inc. NOW OPEN Membership of Minding Animals International Incorporated is now open to all individuals at the flat rate of $20.00 USD for the period up to 31 December, 2017. Please follow this link to join: http://www.mindinganimals.com/members-donors/ Membership fees will be on a calendar year basis. So, if you join at any time in 2017, the fee remains at $20.00USD, and will be ready for renewal on 1 January, 2018 – so the earlier you join the better! Renewal notices will be sent to your nominated email address at the end of 2017. On 1 January, 2018, membership fees will increase to $50.00USD, or $25.00USD for full time students (with proof if ID), for the period up to 31 December, 2018. What does membership of Minding Animals mean? Being a member of Minding Animals will enhance the benefits that the organisation will be able to provide. A member is essentially, and legally speaking, a supporter; similar to most other animal and environmental organisations, particularly charities like Minding Animals, that are organised by a Board of Directors. Other organisations will not be able to become members. Initially, and for a limited time (up to 31 January, 2017, ONLY), all new members will also be able to register for the conference in México at a $100.00USD discount (a saving of $300.00USD off the full registration rate). This discount will drop to $50.00USD off the registration fee from 1 February, 2017. Details of registration fees for the conference in Ciudad de México will be available from 15 December at: http://www.mindinganimals4.umich.mx/ Benefits will be added for all members over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Research Paper Series
    Legal Research Paper Series NON HUMAN ANIMALS AND THE LAW: A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ANIMAL LAW RESOURCES AT THE STANFORD LAW LIBRARY By Rita K. Lomio and J. Paul Lomio Research Paper No. 6 October 2005 Robert Crown Law Library Crown Quadrangle Stanford, California 94305-8612 NON HUMAN ANIMALS AND THE LAW: A BIBLIOGRPAHY OF ANIMAL LAW RESOURCES AT THE STANFORD LAW LIBRARY I. Books II. Reports III. Law Review Articles IV. Newspaper Articles (including legal newspapers) V. Sound Recordings and Films VI. Web Resources I. Books RESEARCH GUIDES AND BIBLIOGRAPHIES Hoffman, Piper, and the Harvard Student Animal Legal Defense Fund The Guide to Animal Law Resources Hollis, New Hampshire: Puritan Press, 1999 Reference KF 3841 G85 “As law students, we have found that although more resources are available and more people are involved that the case just a few years ago, locating the resource or the person we need in a particular situation remains difficult. The Guide to Animal Law Resources represents our attempt to collect in one place some of the resources a legal professional, law professor or law student might want and have a hard time finding.” Guide includes citations to organizations and internships, animal law court cases, a bibliography, law schools where animal law courses are taught, Internet resources, conferences and lawyers devoted to the cause. The International Institute for Animal Law A Bibliography of Animal Law Resources Chicago, Illinois: The International Institute for Animal Law, 2001 KF 3841 A1 B53 Kistler, John M. Animal Rights: A Subject Guide, Bibliography, and Internet Companion Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000 HV 4708 K57 Bibliography divided into six subject areas: Animal Rights: General Works, Animal Natures, Fatal Uses of Animals, Nonfatal Uses of Animals, Animal Populations, and Animal Speculations.
    [Show full text]
  • JAHR 4-2011.Indd
    JAHR Vol. 2 No. 4 2011 UDK 575.4:17.03 Conference paper Eve-Marie Engels* Th e importance of Charles Darwin‘s theory for Fritz Jahr‘s conception of bioethics "Man in his arrogance thinks himself a great work. worthy the interposition of a deity, more humble & I believe true to consider him created from animals."** Charles Darwin, 1838 ABSTRACT Fritz Jahr is a pioneer of bioethics. In this article I will present and outline Jahr’s bioethical programme with a special emphasis on Charles Darwin’s role in Jahr’s ethics. According to Jahr, useful and effi cient animal protection can only be practised well if we have enough knowledge of nature. Jahr refers to Darwin who revolutionised our view of life and of the relationship between the human being and the rest of living nature. In the fi rst introductory section I will shortly present Jahr’s overall perspective and his bioethical imperative. I will also give a very short sketch of today’s bioethics. In the second and third section I will outline Dar- win’s revolutionary theory and its application to the human being. I will also present some of the reactions of his contemporaries which refl ect Darwin’s achievement for our understanding of living nature. In the fourth section I will go back to Fritz Jahr and will present and discuss diff erent aspects of his approach in more detail. A fi nal quotation from Hans Jonas about the dialectical character of Darwinism will trenchantly highlight Darwin’s importance for Fritz Jahr’s ethics.
    [Show full text]
  • Landmark Philanthropy Cummings Foundation Gift Heralds a New Future for Veterinary School
    TUFTSVOLUME 6, NO. 2 WINTER 2004 Landmark Philanthropy Cummings Foundation Gift Heralds a New Future for Veterinary School PLUS: ANIMALS AS SENTINELS N RECORD OF GIVING from the dean Amazing, Historic, Wonderful T UFTS VETERINARY a few weeks ago, the Boston Red Sox won the World MEDICINE Series. What has seemed impossible forever (well, for any of us younger than 86!), has been achieved. The Red Sox are vol. 6, no. 2 winter 2004 number 1. Their fans—here in Massachusetts and from Executive Editor points around the world--are elated. Dr. Philip C. Kosch, Dean Here at Tufts Veterinary School, we’re on top of the School of Veterinary Medicine world for another reason. Cummings Foundation has made an extraordinary gift to Tufts Editorial Advisor University, the largest in the history of the university and, we believe, in the history of vet- Shelley Rodman, Director Veterinary Development and Alumni Relations erinary medical education. It is our cause for celebration. Editor/Writer Tufts University started the veterinary school because it was the right thing to do—for Cynthia B. Hanson Tufts, which had, and still has, extraordinary strengths in the life sciences, and for New Art Director England which had had no operating veterinary school since the 1940s (Middlesex Margot Grisar Veterinary College operated on what is now the Brandeis University campus from 1938 to Tufts University Publications 1947; it was never accredited). Jean Mayer, a world-renowned nutritionist, championed the Graphic Designer Kelly McMurray/2communiqué establishment of the school, first mentioning the possibility in his September 1976 inaugu- ral speech as President of Tufts University.
    [Show full text]