Source: http://viopet.org/legislacion/ordenes-de-proteccion-que-incluyen-animales-de-compania/
Timestamp: 2017-12-18 03:04:00
Document Index: 39779628

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 13', '§ 9', '§ 6320', '§ 18', '§ 46', '§ 16', '§ 741', '§ 586', '§ 236', '§ 4007', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 11', '§ 518', '§33', '§ 173', '§ 842', '§ 50', '§ 3113', '§ 60', '§ 107', '§ 1678', '§ 1678', '§ 20', '§ 36', '§ 85', '§ 1103', '§ 16', '§ 48', '§ 813']

Órdenes de Protección que incluyen animales de compañía | VioPet
ÓRDENES DE PROTECCIÓN QUE INCLUYEN A LOS ANIMALES DE COMPAÑÍA
Para proteger a los animales y evitar que las mujeres retrasen la marcha del hogar, en 31 estados de EEUU los animales se incluyen en las órdenes de alejamiento en casos de violencia doméstica.
Actualmente, hay 31 estados, DC y Puerto Rico donde los animales están incluidos en las OP.
Modelo de OP:
RESUMEN DE LA LEGISLACIÓN
***NOVEDAD NOVIEMBRE 2016**** ALASKA aprueba la Ley HB 147
A. R. S. § 13-3602
A.C.A. § 9-15-205 and 9-15-401 to 407
Upon a finding of domestic abuse, a court may “[d]irect the care, custody, or control of any pet. owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party residing in the household” in an order for protection filed by a petitioner. Arkansas also defines emotional abuse to include harming a spouse’s pet in its Spousal Safety Plan Act; emotional abuse, if committed by a spouse against hir or her spouse, also constitutes spousal abuse.
West’s Ann. Cal. Fam. Code § 6320 – 6327
On a showing of good cause, the court may include in a protective order a grant to the petitioner of thUnder this Connecticut law, any family or household member who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family may apply to the Superior Court for an order of protection. The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal. e exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent.
C. R. S. A. § 18-6-800.3
This statute includes within the definition of “domestic violence” any other crime against a person, or against property, including an animal, or any municipal ordinance violation against a person, or against property, including an animal, when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship.
C.G.S.A. § 46b-15
Under this Connecticut law, any family or household member who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family may apply to the Superior Court for an order of protection. The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.
6. District of Columbia (D.C.)
DC CODE § 16-1005
This D.C. law provides that if, after a hearing, the judicial officer finds that there is good cause to believe the respondent has committed or threatened to commit a criminal offense against the petitioner or against petitioner’s animal or an animal in petitioner’s household, the judicial officer may issue a protection order that directs the care, custody, or control of a domestic animal that belongs to petitioner or respondent or lives in his or her household.
West’s F. S. A. § 741.30
This Florida law allows petitioners to file injunctions for protection against domestic violence. Among the described incidents of domestic violence from which the petitioner may obtain protection is where the respondent has “intentionally injured or killed a family pet.” The court also considers this as a factor when determining whether there is reasonable cause to believe the petitioner is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence. In 2012, an amendment was added to provide exemptions from public records requirements for personal identifying and location information of victims of domestic violence, repeat violence, sexual violence, and dating violence held by the clerks and law enforcement agencies.
H R S § 586-4
In Hawaii, the ex parte temporary restraining order may also enjoin or restrain both of the parties from taking, concealing, removing, threatening, physically abusing, or otherwise disposing of any animal identified to the court as belonging to a household, until further order of the court.
725 I.L.C.S. 5/112A-14
This Illinois law allows a court to issue an order of protection if the court finds that petitioner has been abused by a family or household member. It also allows for the protection of animals in domestic violence situations. The court can “[g]rant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal.”
I.C.A. §§ 236.3, 236.4, 236.5
Iowa now allows the court to grant petitioners exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets or companion animals in both temporary and permanent orders. The animals can belong to the petitioner, the abuser, or a minor child of the petitioner or the abuser. The court can also order the abuser to stay away from the animals and not take, hide, bother, attack, threaten, or otherwise get rid of the pet or companion animal.
LA R.S. 46:2135
This Louisiana law allows a court to enter a temporary restraining order, without bond, as it deems necessary to protect from abuse the petitioner. Among the provisions is one that allows the court to grant “. . . to the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets belonging to or under the care of the petitioner or minor children residing in the residence or household of either party, and directing the defendant to refrain from harassing, interfering with, abusing or injuring any pet, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party.”
19-A M. R. S. A. § 4007
This Maine law concerning personal protection orders in cases of abuse was amended in March of 2006 to include companion animals in protection orders. The new language specifies that a court may enter an order directing the care, custody or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.
MD FAMILY § 4-501, 504.1
This Maryland law amended in 2011 allows an interim protective order to award temporary possession of any pet (defined in § 4-501 as a domesticated animal except livestock) to the person eligible for relief or the respondent).
M.G.L.A. 209A § 11
This Massachusetts law, effective October of 2012, allows the court to order the possession, care and control of any domesticated animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household to the plaintiff or petitioner in a no contact or restraining order. The court may order the defendant to refrain from abusing, threatening, taking, interfering with, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming or otherwise disposing of such animal.
M. C. L. A. 600.295
This Michigan law relates to an action for a personal protection order to restrain/enjoin several categories of individuals: (1) a spouse or former spouse; (2) a person with whom the petitioner has a child in common; (3) a person in a dating relationship with petitioner; or (4) an individual who resided or is residing in the same household as the petitioner. Effective August 1, 2016, the order may now restrain or enjoin those mentioned individuals from engaging in the following actions if that person has the intent to cause the petitioner mental distress or to exert control over the petitioner with respect to an animal in which the petitioner has an ownership interest: (1) injuring, killing, torturing, neglecting, or threatening to injure, kill, torture, or neglect the animal; (2) removing the animal from the petitioner’s possession; or (3) retaining or obtaining possession of the animal. Section 30 describes the criteria under which a petitioner is deemed to have an ownership interest in an animal.
M.S.A. § 518B.01
This law reflects Minnesota’s provision for restraining orders in cases of domestic abuse. An amendment in 2010 concerns the care and keeping of a companion animal owed by either petitioner or respondent, and has a provision to allow the court to prevent harm to such animal. As stated in the law, “The order may direct the care, possession, or control of a pet or companion animal owned, possessed, or kept by the petitioner or respondent or a child of the petitioner or respondent. It may also direct the respondent to refrain from physically abusing or injuring any pet or companion animal, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party as an indirect means of intentionally threatening the safety of such person.”
NEV. REV. STAT. §33.018
In Nevada, a knowing, purposeful or reckless course of conduct intended to harass the other such as in juring or killing an animal, is included in their definition of Domestic Violence. A victim can then get a Protection Order and e njoin the adverse party from physically injuring, threatening to injure or taking possession of any animal that is owned or kept by the applicant or minor child, either directly or through an agent.
N.H. Rev. Stat. §§ 173-B:1, 173:B4, 173:B5
New Hampshire now considers animal cruelty to be “abuse” under its protection of persons from domestic violence statute. The law now allows a judge to grant the petitioner of a protective order exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the victim, the abuser, or a minor child in the household; the law also allows a judge to order the abuser to stay away from the pet in both temporary and final domestic violence protective orders.
N.J.S.A. 2C:25-26, 27,28, 29
On January 17, 2012, Governor Christie signed the Domestic Violence Pet Protection Law. The law authorizes courts to include pets in domestic violence restraining orders. The court is allowed to enter an order “prohibiting the defendant from having any contact with any animal owed, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.”
McKinney’s Family Court Act § 842
This New York law pertains to the issuance of protection orders. In July of 2006, the amendment that allows companion animals owned by the petitioner of the order or a minor child residing in the household to be included in the order was signed into law. The law specifically allows a court to order the respondent to refrain from intentionally injuring or killing, without justification, any companion animal the respondent knows to be owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner or a minor child residing in the household.
N.C.G.S.A. § 50B-3
This North Carolina law reflects the state’s provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. A protective order may provide for possession of personal property of the parties, including the care, custody, and control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household. The court may also order a party to refrain from cruelly treating or abusing an animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household.
R.C. § 3113.31
In 2014, the law was amended to allow a court to grant a protection order that may: (E)(1)(i) require that the respondent not remove, damage, hide, harm, or dispose of any companion animal owned or possessed by the petitioner; and (j) authorize the petitioner to remove a companion animal owned by the petitioner from the possession of the respondent. “Companion animal” has the same meaning as in section 959.131 of the Revised Code, which is defined as any animal that is kept inside a residential dwelling and any dog or cat regardless of where it is kept. The term “companion animal” does not include livestock or any wild animal.
Okl. St. Ann. § 60.2
This Oklahoma law reflects the state’s provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. The person seeking a protective order may further request the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner, defendant or minor child residing in the residence of the petitioner or defendant. The court may order the defendant to make no contact with the animal and forbid the defendant from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, molesting, attacking, striking, threatening, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal.
O.R.S. § 107.718
Under this Oregon law, if requested by a petitioner who has been the victim of domestic abuse, the court may enter an order to protect a companion or therapy animal. This includes an order to “[p]revent the neglect and protect the safety of any service or therapy animal or any animal kept for personal protection or companionship, but not an animal kept for any business, commercial, agricultural or economic purpose.”
25. Puerto Rico
PR ST T. 5 § 1678; 5 L.P.R.A. § 1678
Code 1976 § 20-4-60
South Carolina now allows a judge to issue a protective order that prohibits the harm or harassment against any pet animal owned, possessed, kept, or held by the petitioner; any family or household member designated in the order; or the respondent if the petitioner has a demonstrated interest in the pet animal.The law also allows the judge to issue a protective order that provides for temporary possession of the personal property, including pet animals, of the parties and order assistance from law enforcement officers in removing personal property of the petitioner if the respondent’s eviction has not been ordered.
T. C. A. § 36-3-601
Under Tennessee’s Domestic Abuse Act, the definitional section states that “abuse” includes inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by an adult or minor. Section 606(9) allows the court to direct the care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor residing in the household. Further, in no instance shall the animal be placed in the care, custody, or control of the respondent, but shall instead be placed in the care, custody or control of the petitioner or in an appropriate animal foster situation.
V.T.C.A., Family Code § 85.021
In a protective order in Texas, the court may prohibit a party from removing a pet, companion animal, or assistance animal, as defined by Section 121.002, Human Resources Code, from the possession of a person named in the order.
15 V.S.A. § 1103
Vermont law was amended to allow a court to include an order relating to the possession, care and control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held as a pet by either party or a minor child residing in the household in a domestic violence situation.
VA Code Ann.§§ 16.1-253, 16.1-253.1, 16.1-253.4, 16.1-279.1, 19.2-152.8, 19.2-152.9, and 19.2-152.10
In 2014, Virginia amended its Protective Order laws to grant petitioners possession of any “companion animal,” so long as the petitioner is considered the owner. Companion animals include any family pets, such as dogs, cats, hamsters, etc., but do not include farm animals. To be considered an owner, a petitioner must either have a property interest in the animal, keep or house the animal, have the animal in their care, or have acted as a custodian of the animal. This new provision is now included in Virginia’s Emergency Protective Orders, Preliminary Protective Orders, and Protective Orders.
West’s RCWA 26.50.060
This Washington law reflects the state’s provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. In addition to other forms of relief, a court may also order possession and use of essential personal effects. Personal effects may include pets. The court may order that a petitioner be granted the exclusive custody or control of any pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing with either the petitioner or respondent and may prohibit the respondent from interfering with the petitioner’s efforts to remove the pet. The court may also prohibit the respondent from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining within, a specified distance of specified locations where the pet is regularly found.
W. Va. Code, § 48-27-503
In West Virginia, the terms of a protective order may include awarding the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and prohibiting the respondent from taking, concealing, molesting, physically injuring, killing or otherwise disposing of the animal and limiting or precluding contact by the respondent with the animal.
Wis. Stat. Ann. § 813.12, 813.122, 813.123
Wisconsin allows “household pets,” defined as domestic animals that are not farm animals, that are kept, owned, or cared for by the petitioner or by a family member or a household member of the petitioner, to be included in restraining orders or injunctions in domestic abuse cases, child abuse cases, and cases filed by “individuals as risk.” In both cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, a judge or circuit court commissioner shall issue a temporary restraining order ordering the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet, to allow the petitioner or a family member or household member of the petitioner acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet, or any combination of these remedies requested in the petition. An “individual at risk” may also seek a TRO and injunction that orders the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet and allow the individual at risk or a guardian, guardian ad litem, family member, or household member of the individual at risk acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet.