Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511 (2026)
Cruelty to animals (Repealed).
✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
PA-LEGpalegis.us
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 5511. Cruelty to animals (Repealed).
2017 Repeal. Section 5511 was repealed June 28, 2017, P.L.215, No.10, effective in 60 days.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 55
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2021 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Clarke, 70 A.3d 1281 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
Commonwealth v. Clarke, 70 A.3d 1281 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013). “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (a)(2)(i)-(ii). . As I discuss infra, Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Padilla-Vargas, 204 A.3d 971 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(a)(2.1)(i)(a). 4 " 'Willful' conduct is the same as 'knowing' conduct" under the Crimes Code.”
Commonwealth v. Baumgartner, 206 A.3d 11 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “: Because I disagree with the majority that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to convict of animal fighting "for amusement or gain" under 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(h.1)(1) (Animal Fighting), I respectfully dissent.”
Commonwealth v. Kneller, 999 A.2d 608 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “§ 5511(a), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held, in relevant part, the following: Here, the clear and unambiguous language of the enhancement provision for use of a deadly weapon directs the trial court to apply the enhancement when the defendant has used a deadly weapon "in…”
Commonwealth v. Rush, 162 A.3d 530 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “In Crawford we explained that "malicious” in the context of 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (a)(2.1 )(i)(A) (cruelty to animals) "is conduct that represents a ‘wickedness of disposition, hardness of heart, cruelty, recklessness of consequences, and a mind regardless of social duty.”
Commonwealth v. Hackenberger, 836 A.2d 2 (Pa. 2003). “[3] 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. [4] One of the workers actually saw a man firing a rifle at Chief as the dog attempted to cross the street.”
Seeton v. Adams, 50 A.3d 268 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012). “See-ton seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the District Attorney to prosecute the Pike Township Sportsmen’s Association for conducting a live pigeon shoot in a manner that Seeton believes to have violated the Animal Cruelty Law, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Concluding that the trial court…”
Kauffman v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 766 F. Supp. 2d 555 (E.D. Pa. 2011). “Defendants respond that “Sullivan and Mutch are entitled to qualified immunity, for their investigation of suspected animal cruelty pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Should it be determined that Plaintiffs Exhibit 3 is somehow defective, the officers are nonetheless entitled to…”
Bamont v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 163 F. Supp. 3d 138 (E.D. Pa. 2016). “71 She cites 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (1) authorizing seizure of “evidence *150 of the violation including, but not limited to, the animals which were the subject of the violation.”
Allen v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 488 F. Supp. 2d 450 (M.D. Penn. 2007). “Defendants HSHA and PSPCA were entities statutorily authorized to enforce Pennsylvania laws pertaining to criminal cruelty-to-animals violations under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511 . (Doc. No. 20, ¶¶ 5, 13); see supra footnote 2.”
Commonwealth v. Grove, 170 A.3d 1127 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “In 2014, Grove was convicted of one count of cruelty to animals, 18 Pa. C.S. § 5511(a)(2.1)(A), for shooting his dog and leaving it to die.”
Commonwealth v. Balog, 672 A.2d 319 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996). “Following trial, á jury found Balog guilty of cruelty to animals (gamecocks), pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(h.1)(3). The trial court sentenced Balog to a term of 54 months’ probation, a $1,000 fine and ordered him to pay restitution.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(1) — 1 case
Bamont v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 163 F. Supp. 3d 138 (E.D. Pa. 2016). “71 She cites 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (1) authorizing seizure of “evidence *150 of the violation including, but not limited to, the animals which were the subject of the violation.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(a) — 15 cases
Commonwealth v. Padilla-Vargas, 204 A.3d 971 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(a)(2.1)(i)(a). 4 " 'Willful' conduct is the same as 'knowing' conduct" under the Crimes Code.”
Commonwealth v. Kneller, 999 A.2d 608 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “§ 5511(a), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held, in relevant part, the following: Here, the clear and unambiguous language of the enhancement provision for use of a deadly weapon directs the trial court to apply the enhancement when the defendant has used a deadly weapon "in…”
Commonwealth v. Clarke, 70 A.3d 1281 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013). “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (a)(2)(i)-(ii). . As I discuss infra, Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Grove, 170 A.3d 1127 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “In 2014, Grove was convicted of one count of cruelty to animals, 18 Pa. C.S. § 5511(a)(2.1)(A), for shooting his dog and leaving it to die.”
Commonwealth v. Rush, 162 A.3d 530 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “In Crawford we explained that "malicious” in the context of 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (a)(2.1 )(i)(A) (cruelty to animals) "is conduct that represents a ‘wickedness of disposition, hardness of heart, cruelty, recklessness of consequences, and a mind regardless of social duty.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(a)(1) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Clarke, 70 A.3d 1281 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013). “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511 (a)(2)(i)-(ii). . As I discuss infra, Commonwealth v.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(a)(1)(i) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Hackenberger, 836 A.2d 2 (Pa. 2003). “[3] 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. [4] One of the workers actually saw a man firing a rifle at Chief as the dog attempted to cross the street.”
Com. v. Nichols, D. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(a)(l)(i) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Tapper, 29 Pa. D. & C.4th 25 (1995).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(c) — 8 cases
Allen v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 488 F. Supp. 2d 450 (M.D. Penn. 2007). “Defendants HSHA and PSPCA were entities statutorily authorized to enforce Pennsylvania laws pertaining to criminal cruelty-to-animals violations under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511 . (Doc. No. 20, ¶¶ 5, 13); see supra footnote 2.”
Commonwealth v. Barnes, 629 A.2d 123 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).
Seeton v. Adams, 50 A.3d 268 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012). “See-ton seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the District Attorney to prosecute the Pike Township Sportsmen’s Association for conducting a live pigeon shoot in a manner that Seeton believes to have violated the Animal Cruelty Law, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Concluding that the trial court…”
Hulsizer v. Labor Day Comm., Inc., 734 A.2d 848 (Pa. 1999).
Tammy R.A. Little d/b/a Creature Comforts Rehab. Ranch v. Dept. of Agric., Bureau of Dog Law Enf't (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(c)(1) — 10 cases
Commonwealth v. Arcelay, 190 A.3d 609 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2018).
Commonwealth v. Padilla-Vargas, 204 A.3d 971 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019). “18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(a)(2.1)(i)(a). 4 " 'Willful' conduct is the same as 'knowing' conduct" under the Crimes Code.”
Seeton v. Adams, 50 A.3d 268 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2012). “See-ton seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the District Attorney to prosecute the Pike Township Sportsmen’s Association for conducting a live pigeon shoot in a manner that Seeton believes to have violated the Animal Cruelty Law, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Concluding that the trial court…”
Zimmerman v. Wolff, 622 F. Supp. 2d 240 (E.D. Pa. 2008).
Com. v. Kuhns, T., II (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(c)(2) — 1 case
Tammy R.A. Little d/b/a Creature Comforts Rehab. Ranch v. Dept. of Agric., Bureau of Dog Law Enf't (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(c)(3) — 1 case
Kauffman v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 766 F. Supp. 2d 555 (E.D. Pa. 2011). “Defendants respond that “Sullivan and Mutch are entitled to qualified immunity, for their investigation of suspected animal cruelty pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Should it be determined that Plaintiffs Exhibit 3 is somehow defective, the officers are nonetheless entitled to…”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(g) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Gonzales, 48 Pa. D. & C.3d 386 (1988).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(i) — 5 cases
Kauffman v. Pennsylvania Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 766 F. Supp. 2d 555 (E.D. Pa. 2011). “Defendants respond that “Sullivan and Mutch are entitled to qualified immunity, for their investigation of suspected animal cruelty pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511. Should it be determined that Plaintiffs Exhibit 3 is somehow defective, the officers are nonetheless entitled to…”
Commonwealth v. Cline, 800 A.2d 978 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2002).
Commonwealth v. Barnes, 629 A.2d 123 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).
Hulsizer v. Labor Day Comm., Inc., 734 A.2d 848 (Pa. 1999).
In re the Fayette Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Inc., 28 Pa. D. & C.4th 187 (1993).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(j) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Younge, 667 A.2d 739 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1995).
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5511(q) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. Balog, 672 A.2d 319 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1996). “Following trial, á jury found Balog guilty of cruelty to animals (gamecocks), pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 5511(h.1)(3). The trial court sentenced Balog to a term of 54 months’ probation, a $1,000 fine and ordered him to pay restitution.”
Commonwealth v. Barnes, 629 A.2d 123 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.