Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (2026)
Definitions for animal offenses
✓ current as of May 2026
As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires:
- (1) "Animal" means a domesticated living creature or a wild creature previously captured;
- (2) "Livestock" means all equine as well as animals which are being raised primarily for use as food or fiber for human utilization or consumption including, but not limited to, cattle, sheep, swine, goats, and poultry;
- (3) "Non-livestock animal" means a pet normally maintained in or near the household or households of its owner or owners, other domesticated animal, previously captured wildlife, an exotic animal, or any other pet, including but not limited to, pet rabbits, a pet chick, duck, or pot bellied pig that is not classified as "livestock" pursuant to this part; and
- (4) "Torture" means every act, omission, or neglect whereby unreasonable physical pain, suffering, or death is caused or permitted, but nothing in this part shall be construed as prohibiting the shooting of birds or game for the purpose of human food or the use of animate targets by incorporated gun clubs.
Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1997, ch. 90, §§ 2, 5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, 181 S.W.3d 292 (Tenn. 2005).
Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, 181 S.W.3d 292 (Tenn. 2005). “A “nonlivestock animal” is “a pet normally maintained in or near the household or households of its owner or owners, other domesticated animal, previously captured wildlife, an exotic animal, or any other pet_” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-201(3) (2003). *313 In our view, the lethal…”
United States v. Stevens, 533 F.3d 218 (3rd Cir. 2008). “Codified Laws §§ 40-1-1-40 -1-41 (2008); Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-14-201 to 39-14-214 (2008); Tex Penal Code Ann.”
State of Tennessee v. Jessica Hartle Lumpkins (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “M2021-01144-CCA-R3-CD ___________________________________ The State of Tennessee appeals the trial court’s dismissal of two counts of animal cruelty on the basis that an emu met the statutory definition of livestock under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-14-201, that the…”
State of Tennessee v. Jessica Hartle Lumpkins (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “M2021-01144-CCA-R3-CD ___________________________________ The State of Tennessee appeals the trial court’s dismissal of two counts of animal cruelty on the basis that an emu met the statutory definition of livestock under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-14-201, that the…”
State of Tennessee v. Dinnie Merel Robertson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (3). -7- Conversely, “livestock” is defined as “all equine as well as animals which are being raised primarily for use as food or fiber for human utilization or consumption including, but not limited to, cattle, sheep, swine, goats, and poultry .”
State of Tennessee v. Kelley Irene Engel Gambill (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (4). The Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence as to the elements of the offense, except as it relates to the statutory exception where the acts were done with a “justifiable purpose.”
State of Tennessee v. Michael Patrick Sullivan & Deborah Clark Buckner, Alias (Tenn. Crim. App. 2021). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (2). a. Procedural Facts Co-defendant Buckner filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence obtained by the March 7, 2015 entry and search of the Defendants’ property pursuant to a search warrant, arguing, in relevant part, that the search…”
Thompson v. Woodbury Veterinary Hosp. (M.D. Tenn. 2025). “”7 Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (4). Reading these provisions together, a person who engages in an act that causes unreasonable physical pain to an animal commits the offense of animal cruelty.”
State of Tennessee v. Patricia Adkisson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (4). While there was no evidence of what caused the terrier's injuries, it was within the jury's province to infer from the circumstances that the defendant's neglect of those injuries resulted in unreasonable pain and suffering to the terrier.”
Unknown, 559 U.S. 460. “and persons who properly kill any animal used for food and sport hunting, trapping, and fishing as authorized by the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, are exempt from the provisions of this chapter”) Tennessee Tenn. Code Ann. §39-14-201 (1) (2010 Supp.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201(3) — 4 cases
Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, 181 S.W.3d 292 (Tenn. 2005). “A “nonlivestock animal” is “a pet normally maintained in or near the household or households of its owner or owners, other domesticated animal, previously captured wildlife, an exotic animal, or any other pet_” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-201(3) (2003). *313 In our view, the lethal…”
State of Tennessee v. Jessica Hartle Lumpkins (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “M2021-01144-CCA-R3-CD ___________________________________ The State of Tennessee appeals the trial court’s dismissal of two counts of animal cruelty on the basis that an emu met the statutory definition of livestock under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-14-201, that the…”
State of Tennessee v. Jessica Hartle Lumpkins (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “M2021-01144-CCA-R3-CD ___________________________________ The State of Tennessee appeals the trial court’s dismissal of two counts of animal cruelty on the basis that an emu met the statutory definition of livestock under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-14-201, that the…”
State of Tennessee v. Kelley Irene Engel Gambill (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-201 (4). The Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence as to the elements of the offense, except as it relates to the statutory exception where the acts were done with a “justifiable purpose.”
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.