Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448For the purpose of putting a speedy end to the suffering of hopelessly diseased and disabled animals, any person finding any abandoned domestic animal which is diseased or injured past recovery may apply to any magistrate of the county, who may summarily decide whether such animal should be destroyed, after giving notice to the owner, if known, whenever such notice can be given without defeating the object of this Code section. The order authorizing the destruction of such animal shall not defeat the owner's claim for damages against the person destroying or procuring the destruction of such animal.
(Ga. L. 1878-79, p. 183, § 2; Code 1882, § 4612(b); Civil Code 1895, § 1755; Civil Code 1910, § 2014; Code 1933, § 62-211; Ga. L. 1983, p. 884, § 4-1.)
- 4 Am. Jur. 2d, Animals, § 39 et seq.
Justifiable Destruction of Animal, 37 POF2d 711.
- 3B C.J.S., Animals, § 244 et seq.
- Constitutionality of statute or ordinance providing for destruction of animals, 8 A.L.R. 67; 56 A.L.R.2d 1024.
Constitutionality of "dog laws," 49 A.L.R. 847.
Right to and measure of compensation for animals or trees destroyed to prevent spread of disease or infection, 67 A.L.R. 208.
Validity of statute or ordinance providing for destruction of dogs, 56 A.L.R.2d 1024.
Measure, elements, and amount of damages for killing or injuring cat, 8 A.L.R.4th 1287.
Construction of provisions of statute or ordinance governing occasion, time, or manner of summary destruction of domestic animals by public authorities, 42 A.L.R.4th 839.
Total Results: 20
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-02-06
Snippet: specialty hospital. See OCGA § 31-6-40 (a) (1), (4), (5), (6). Some facilities and services are exempt
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-06-21
Snippet: a unanimous decision. On counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, and 15 the jury
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-06-24
Citation: 830 S.E.2d 160, 306 Ga. 204
Snippet: Robbery and Aggravated Assault as alleged in Counts 4,[ ]5, 6 and 7 of [the] Indictment by using a firearm to
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-03-11
Citation: 826 S.E.2d 82, 305 Ga. 513
Snippet: murder (counts 3 and 32); felony murder (counts 4, 5, 6, 33, 34, and 35); armed robbery (counts 2, 11,
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-09-13
Citation: 302 Ga. 29, 805 S.E.2d 40, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 764
Snippet: Scott got into the victim’s truck, Jackson heard “4, 5, 6 maybe” gunshots and saw the victim falling out
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2002-09-16
Citation: 569 S.E.2d 530, 275 Ga. 450, 2002 Fulton County D. Rep. 2657, 2002 Ga. LEXIS 632
Snippet: 1999, and found guilty of counts (1), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (9). The jury acquitted him of
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1999-11-01
Citation: 523 S.E.2d 294, 271 Ga. 783, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 3977, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 909
Snippet: Benham, C. J, who concurs in Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, and 13 and in the judgment, and Hunstein
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1999-07-06
Citation: 518 S.E.2d 898, 271 Ga. 301
Snippet: and 16. Martin was found guilty of Counts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (criminal attempt to commit armed robbery); 7 (criminal
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1998-11-23
Citation: 507 S.E.2d 737, 270 Ga. 234, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 3987, 1998 Ga. LEXIS 1155
Snippet: FLETCHER, P.J., who concurs in Divisions 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and in the judgment. NOTES [1] The homicide
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1997-01-21
Citation: 480 S.E.2d 573, 267 Ga. 543, 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 231, 1997 Ga. LEXIS 25
Snippet: except HUNSTEIN, J., who concurs in Divisions 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and in the judgment. NOTES [1] The
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1996-09-09
Citation: 475 S.E.2d 590, 267 Ga. 100, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 3233, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 531
Snippet: FLETCHER, P.J., who concurs in Divisions 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and in the judgment. NOTES [1] The crimes occurred
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1996-02-12
Citation: 466 S.E.2d 205, 266 Ga. 223, 96 Fulton County D. Rep. 618, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 66
Snippet: and Carley, J., who concurs in Divisions 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and in the judgment. The crime occurred
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1993-12-02
Citation: 437 S.E.2d 782, 263 Ga. 609, 93 Fulton County D. Rep. 4329, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 823
Snippet: refund which the majority addresses in Divs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of its opinion. I would note, however, that
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1990-05-24
Citation: 391 S.E.2d 754, 260 Ga. 184
Snippet: habeas court properly denied relief on grounds 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 16 and 21 of Baxter's amended petition
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1985-11-27
Citation: 336 S.E.2d 762, 255 Ga. 215
Snippet: issuance of the search warrant. 2. Enumerations 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13 and 15 complain of various aspects of
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1984-03-15
Citation: 313 S.E.2d 693, 252 Ga. 305, 1984 Ga. LEXIS 690
Snippet: (1) (191 SE 439) (1937). Enumerations of error 4, 5, 6, and 7, urging error in the refusal to give requested
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1983-09-09
Citation: 306 S.E.2d 302, 251 Ga. 447, 1983 Ga. LEXIS 849
Snippet: (175 SE2d 654) (1970). (4) Enumerations of error 4, 5, 6, and 7 all deal with the sufficiency of the evidence
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1983-04-06
Citation: 301 S.E.2d 870, 250 Ga. 822, 1983 Ga. LEXIS 653
Snippet: Action of, §§ 3, 6, 10; 17 CJS 554, Contracts, §§ 4, 5, 6; Dobbs, Handbook on the Law of Remedies, § 4.2
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1981-10-08
Citation: 248 Ga. 353, 283 S.E.2d 237, 1981 Ga. LEXIS 992
Snippet: proof by extrinsic evidence. Enumerations of error 4, 5, 6, and 7 are without merit. This same reasoning applies
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1981-09-29
Citation: 282 S.E.2d 629, 248 Ga. 325, 1981 Ga. LEXIS 973
Snippet: enumerations of error. 2. Enumerations of error 4, 5, 6, 7 and 22 contend that the trial court erred in