Leashes 
The municipal codes of various
cities require owners to keep their dogs on a leash. For example, the
Los Angeles Municipal Code states:
Sec. 53.06. No person
owning or having possession, charge, custody or control of any animal,
except cats which are not in heat or season, shall cause, permit or
allow the animal to stray, run, or in any manner to be at large in
or upon any public street, sidewalk or park, except as otherwise expressly
provided in section 63.44 of this Code, or in the bed of the Los Angeles
River or upon any unenclosed lot or land.
Sec. 53.06.02. (a)
Every person owning or having charge, care, custody or control of
any dog shall keep such dog exclusively upon his own premises provided,
however, that such dog may be off such premises if it be under the
control of a competent person and restrained by a substantial chain
or leash not exceeding six feet in length, or under the control of
a competent person on a dog exercise of training area established
pursuant to section 633.44 of this Code.
(b) Notwithstanding
any other provision of this code, every violation of any of the provisions
of this section shall be punishable as an infraction as follows:
1. Upon a first
conviction, by a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25).
2. Upon a second
conviction, and the offense occurred within one year of a prior violation
of this section which resulted in a conviction, by a fine of forty-five
dollars ($45)
3. Upon a third
or subsequent conviction, and the offense occurred within one year
of a prior violation of this section which resulted in a second
or subsequent conviction, by a fine of sixty-five dollars ($65)
The Beverly Hills
Municipal Code is similar:
Sec. 5-2.202. Dogs
running at large.
It shall be unlawful
for any person owning, controlling, or having in their care or custody
any dog, whether licensed or unlicensed, to permit such dog to be
upon any public street, alley, or public place or upon any unenclosed
land or property unless such dog is upon a leash, not exceeding six
(6') feet in length, and in the hands of a person capable of controlling
such dog. (5-1.204 Amd.)
The defense in one
case was that the dog was running loose without the knowledge of the
dog owner. The issue presented to the court was whether the knowledge
of the owner was essential. It held that the city's prohibition against
dogs running at large, or running loose, was effective even though the
dog owner did not know the dog's whereabouts. Here is a summary of that
case:
In Egenreither
v. Carter, a Missouri appellate court held that a plaintiff in a dog
bite case need not show that the dog's owner knew about or affirmatively
consented to the dog's running loose to make out a case of negligence
per se for violation of a leash law. Here, Egenreither was walking
through an alley behind Carter's home. She saw Carter's son come out
of the backyard into the alley through a gate in a chain-link fence.
Shortly thereafter, Carter's dog came through the gate and bit Egenreither's
arm. Egenreither sued Carter for negligence, citing a municipal ordinance
forbidding dog owners to "permit such dog to be found at large
on the streets" without a leash. The judge instructed the jury
at trial that it must find for defendant if it believed that the dog
was at large on the streets but that defendant was not thereby negligent.
The jury found for defendant, but the trial court granted plaintiff's
motion for a new trial.
|
Dog
tags
Dogs are usually
required to keep identification, much like people. The California Food
and Agriculture Code states:
30951.
It is unlawful for any person to own, harbor, or keep any dog over
the age of four months, or to permit such a dog which is owned, harbored,
or controlled by him to run at large, unless the dog has attached
to its neck or leg a substantial collar on which one of the following
is fastened:
(a) A metallic tag which gives the name and post office address
of the owner.
(b) A metal license
tag which is issued by the authority of a county, city and county,
or any municipal corporation for the purpose of identifying the
dog and designating the owner It is against the law to put a tag
on a dog if the tag belongs to a different dog:
30952. It
is unlawful for any person to attach a license tag to the collar of
any dog except the dog which is described in the application for such
license tag
|
