Board of Directors
2018/2019 |
President
John Thomas, Esq.
Secretary-Treasurer
DISTRICT DIRECTORS
District I:
Frank Muggia, Esq.
District II:
Marty Greer, DVM
District III:
Donna Kline, JD
At Large:
Jerry A. Greene, DVM, MS
At Large:
Elizabeth Choate, Esq.
|
| STAY IN TOUCH! |
|
AVMLA Contacts:
202.449.3818 phone
202.449.8560 fax
EMAIL:
|
| Join Our List |
 |
|
|
AVMLA Webinar - November 14, 3:00 PM ET
Reporting Animal Cruelty:
The Veterinarian's Role and Responsibilities
If you are a veterinarian who provides direct care to animals or oversees other veterinarians who do, there is a good chance you will come across situations in which you suspect that an animal has been a victim of cruelty. These situations can be challenging and stressful. You will probably have many questions. How do I know if this is animal cruelty? If I suspect cruelty, should I report it? Who do I report it to? What about confidentiality
and potential liability? What is expected of me if a criminal investigation and prosecution ensue?
This webinar will help answer these questions (and more), providing attendees with an overview of veterinary reporting laws and common criminal animal protection statutes; guidance on figuring out when to report suspected cruelty and who to report it to; and practical tips on navigating confidentiality issues, minimizing legal risk, and implementing best practices. In addition, attendees will gain an understanding of the unique and critical role that veterinarians play if a report results in a criminal investigation and prosecution.
Registration is open, please click or below.
Presenters:
Jennifer H. Chin, Esq., is the Vice President, Legal Advocacy, at The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). In that role, she manages the Legal Advocacy department's "Second Chair" program, which provides legal assistance to local, state, and federal law enforcement and prosecutors nationwide with animal cruelty and animal fighting investigations and prosecutions. In addition, Jennifer oversees the department's civil litigation practice and its submission of amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs in cases with the potential to have a substantial impact on legal protections for animals. Under Jennifer's direction, the department also provides legal analysis and drafting expertise on legislation and regulations affecting animals. Jennifer regularly presents on animal cruelty and the law to animal control officers, law enforcement, prosecutors, veterinarians, and other animal welfare professionals. Prior to joining the ASPCA, Jennifer served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the United States Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey, where she specialized in criminal appeals. Jennifer started her legal career working on
complex civil litigation at a New York City-based international law firm and served as law clerk to two federal judges, first in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, followed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Jennifer received her B.A. from the University of Michigan, her M.A. from Stanford University, and her J.D. from Columbia University School of Law.
Beverly J. Jones, Esq., is SVP and CLO of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), where she provides broad-based legal support and expertise to a wide range of programmatic and infrastructure groups on areas as diverse as contracts, intellectual property, employment, defensive litigation, lobbying and political activity, tax, and animal welfare law. She is also an Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Pathology, Immunology & Laboratory Medicine at the University of Florida, where she teaches a course in Animal Law to veterinarians and forensic veterinary scientists.
Beverly's commitment to excellence within the nonprofit sector has been a hallmark of her legal career. Prior to joining the ASPCA in 2009, Beverly served as Associate General Counsel at the Vera Institute of Justice, and as an associate in the Tax Exempt Organizations practice group of Preston Gates and Ellis, LLP in Seattle (now part of K&L Gates). Beverly earned her A.B. in Government from Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts and a J.D. from Yale Law School in New Haven, Connecticut. After law school, Beverly clerked for the Honorable Chief Justice Deborah T. Poritz of the New Jersey Supreme Court and subsequently served as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund Fellow in Nonprofit Law through the NYU Center on Philanthropy and the Law. She's currently pursuing a Master of Laws in Taxa
tion from Villanova University.
Beverly lives with her spouse, son, and three small but rambunctious dogs in the quaint City Island neighborhood of the North Bronx.
Continuing Education Credit:
1 hour of Continuing Education Credit. Certificate of Completion will be available for all attendees. Please contact
info@avmla.org
|
|
The Legal Perspective
|
|
Impact of New Federal Legislation on Veterinarians
Several pieces of new and proposed federal legislation have the potential to bring significant benefits to veterinarians nationwide. Last December, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new act includes a 20 percent deduction related to pass-through income earned by business owners, and applicable to businesses that engage in health services. Veterinarians have questioned whether they qualify for this deduction under the terms of the statute, the good news is: they do! Because veterinary medicine is included within the IRS's definition of health services and healthcare providers, veterinarians may benefit from the tax cuts subject to certain threshold income limits.
Veterinarians will also benefit from the $1.3 billion spending bill approved by Congress and signed into law by the President in March. It includes a variety of increases in spending strongly supported by the AVMLA. The spending bill features:
- Increase in the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program from $6.5 million to $8 million;
- Continued funding for the Veterinary Services Grant Program;
- Increase in funding from $1.25 million to $2.5 million; for the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank;
- $25 million increase for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative;
- $24 million increase for the Food Safety and Inspection Service;
- Increase from $946 million to $982 million to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; and
- $350 million in payments for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.
The spending bill signed by President Trump also represents a step forward in the battle to increase public access to records previously removed by the USDA from public databases, including a document that calls for increased public access to records concerning animal breeders and animal-related facilities. The battle for such availability began when the USDA removed thousands of records concerning the treatment of animals kept in research labs, zoos, and circuses, claiming the records were removed for privacy concerns. On March 21, 2018, the Humane Society of the United States filed a lawsuit against the USDA for failure to provide these documents. Although the USDA has since reposted some of them, the posted records are heavily redacted and continue to be challenged. The spending bill's call for action legitimized the need for the USDA to comply with federal welfare laws through full transparency.
Furthermore, veterinarians could realize certain financial benefits under the proposed "Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018," typically referred to as the "Farm Bill," currently pending in the House. The proposed legislation covers the span of five years and gives financial priority to animal health programs. It implements a three-pronged approach to animal disease prevention and response, including the implementation of a National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Program to combat animal pest and disease threats, mandatory funding for the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, and full funding for the creation of a U.S.-only National Animal Health Vaccine Bank. The passage of the Farm Bill has the potential to facilitate a proactive approach to improving animal health, and is heavily supported by veterinarian groups across the country.
These favorable developments in regulation and funding for veterinarians will allow for better, more transparent and more complete care for animals nationwide.
|
| Case Review |
|
Ohio Court Strikes Down Breed-specific City Ordinance as Unconstitutional
Russ v. Reynoldsburg
, Case No. 16-CA-58 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017)
Ohio Court strikes down breed-specific city ordinance as unconstitutional
Russ v. Reynoldsburg
, Case No. 16-CA-58 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017)
In 2015, Darlene Russ challenged the constitutionality of an anti-pit bull ordinance in the City of Reynoldsburg in Licking County, Ohio. The ordinance prohibited owning, harboring or keeping a "vicious dog." The ordinance classified all pit bulls as vicious dogs. In the year before, Russ had moved from upstate New York to Reynoldsburg with her pit bull terrier. She had obtained a license for the dog after registering with the Licking County Auditor, pursuant to the State's law. However, on the day she moved into her apartment, she was cited for keeping, harboring, and owning a vicious dog in violation of Reynoldsburg's ordinance.
Russ maintained that Reynoldsburg's breed-specific ordinance "impermissibly conflicts with Ohio state law in violation of the Home Rule Amendment to the Ohio Constitution." Under the Home Rule Amendment, "municipalities . . . have authority to exercise all powers of local self-government and to adopt and enforce within their limits such local police, sanitary and other similar regulations, as are not in conflict with general laws." Accordingly, a state statute takes precedence over a local ordinance when:
(1)
the ordinance is in conflict with the statute;
(2)
the ordinance is an exercise of police power, rather than of local-self government; and
(3)
the statute is general law.
To constitute general law, under the Caton test, a statute must:
(1)
be part of statewide and comprehensive legislative enactment;
(2)
apply to all parts of the state alike and operate uniformly throughout the state;
(3)
set forth police, sanitary, or similar regulations rather than purport only to grant or limit legislative power of a municipal corporation to set forth such regulations; and
(4)
prescribe a rule of conduct upon citizens generally.
Russ maintained that Chapter 955 of Ohio's Revised Code (R.C. 955) constitutes general law. R.C. 955, titled "Dogs," contains statewide provisions regulating dog-related matters, including ownership. The statute also empowered municipalities to adopt and enforce ordinances to control dogs within their jurisdiction that are not otherwise in conflict with the statute's provisions. In 2012, the statute was amended to repeal the automatic inclusion of pit bulls as "vicious dogs." The statute, as amended, abolished breed-specific determinations of whether a dog is vicious or dangerous, and instead, focused on individual conduct. Accordingly, Ohio residents may keep or own any breed of dogs they so choose. Reynoldsburg's ordinance, to the contrary, prohibited ownership of pit bull dogs outright.
The trial court rejected Russ's argument and held R.C. 955 is not a general law under the third prong of the Caton test. The trial court determined that R.C. 955 is not an exercise of police power, and therefore Reynoldsburg did not exceed its authority under the Home Rule Amendment in prohibiting the ownership of pit bulls under its ordinance. Russ appealed.
On April 19, 2017, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision. The appellate court held that R.C. 955 is a general law. R.C. 955 satisfied all requirements of a general law under the Caton test as a "statewide comprehensive legislative enactment" which "applies to uniformly to the whole state without exception," "exercises police power. . . addressing the ownership and control of dogs," and "prescribes a rule of conduct on citizens generally . . . [by] establishing rules that govern all Ohio residents who own dogs." More specifically, with regards to the third prong, the regulation of dogs is an exercise of police power "so as to protect the public against the nuisance pose by a vicious dog."
Upon determining that R.C. 955 constitutes general law, the appellate court held that Reynoldsburg's breed-specific ordinance conflicted with state law and exceeded its authority under the Home Rule Amendment to the Ohio Constitution. Reynoldsburg's ordinance prohibited that which state law positively permits. Contrary to state law, the ordinance labelled all pit bull dogs as vicious without regard to conduct, and outright prohibited keeping, harboring, or owning them.
To date, Russ v. Reynoldsburg remains law.
Russ v. Reynoldsburg
establishes that breed-specific city ordinances in Ohio are unconstitutional under the state's law. All Ohio residents are entitled to keep or own any breed of dogs they so choose, and local ordinances may not provide otherwise.
Several pieces of new and proposed federal legislation have the potential to bring significant benefits to veterinarians nationwide. Last December, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new act includes a 20 percent deduction related to pass-through income earned by business owners, and applicable to businesses that engage in health services. Veterinarians have questioned whether they qualify for this deduction under the terms of the statute, the good news is: they do! Because veterinary medicine is included within the IRS's definition of health services and healthcare providers, veterinarians may benefit from the tax cuts subject to certain threshold income limits.
Veterinarians will also benefit from the $1.3 billion spending bill approved by Congress and signed into law by the President in March. It includes a variety of increases in spending strongly supported by the AVMLA. The spending bill features:
- Increase in the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program from $6.5 million to $8 million;
- Continued funding for the Veterinary Services Grant Program;
- Increase in funding from $1.25 million to $2.5 million; for the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank;
- $25 million increase for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative;
- $24 million increase for the Food Safety and Inspection Service;
- Increase from $946 million to $982 million to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; and
- $350 million in payments for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.
The spending bill signed by President Trump also represents a step forward in the battle to increase public access to records previously removed by the USDA from public databases, including a document that calls for increased public access to records concerning animal breeders and animal-related facilities. The battle for such availability began when the USDA removed thousands of records concerning the treatment of animals kept in research labs, zoos, and circuses, claiming the records were removed for privacy concerns. On March 21, 2018, the Humane Society of the United States filed a lawsuit against the USDA for failure to provide these documents. Although the USDA has since reposted some of them, the posted records are heavily redacted and continue to be challenged. The spending bill's call for action legitimized the need for the USDA to comply with federal welfare laws through full transparency.
Furthermore, veterinarians could realize certain financial benefits under the proposed "Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018," typically referred to as the "Farm Bill," currently pending in the House. The proposed legislation covers the span of five years and gives financial priority to animal health programs. It implements a three-pronged approach to animal disease prevention and response, including the implementation of a National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Program to combat animal pest and disease threats, mandatory funding for the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, and full funding for the creation of a U.S.-only National Animal Health Vaccine Bank. The passage of the Farm Bill has the potential to facilitate a proactive approach to improving animal health, and is heavily supported by veterinarian groups across the country.
These favorable developments in regulation and funding for veterinarians will allow for better, more transparent and more complete care for animals nationwide.
By: Marilyn Yuan, AVMLA Legal Fellow
520 8th Avenue
New York, NY 10018
|
| Introducing: AVMLA Legal Fellow - Marilyn Yuan |
|
 Say hello to the newest member of the AVMLA News Brief!
Marilyn Yuan is a third-year law school student at Brooklyn Law School and currently a legal fellow at ASPCA. She received her undergraduate degree from Fordham University with majors in Political Science and Urban Studies. Prior to law school, Marilyn served as a paralegal at a boutique litigation firm where she specialized in commercial litigation.
She has worked on cases involving employment matters, securities law, and contract issues. In law school, Marilyn leads multiple pro bono programs, including the RAP Sheet Assistance Program, which provides support to clients in undeserved communities who had encounters with the criminal justice system. Outside of school and work, Marilyn enjoys spending time with her cockerpoo, Tobi, whom she dubs her son.
The AVMLA Legal Fellow case review is sponsored by the ASPCA.
|
| AVMLA Membership & More |
|
|
AVMLA Membership & More
Thank you for your continued support of the
AVMLA. To renew your AVMLA Membership dues, simply renew
online, or you are welcome to
download/print/mail your membership app to AVMLA, 1750 K Street, NW, Ste. 700, Washington, DC 20006,
email your app, fax
(
202.449.8560) or give our office a call at
202.449.3818.
If you are interested in contributing to the AVMLA News Brief, advertising or posting a help wanted ad, please send an email to info@AVMLA.org.
|
|
|
|
|
