Here’s an interesting question. How do we know that animals involved in bestiality don’t actually like it?

This question was recently on the mind of one New Jersey jurist. From the Philadelphia Daily News:

During a bizarre hearing [in Burlington County, NJ], a Superior Court judge dismissed animal-cruelty charges against a Moorestown police officer accused of sticking his penis into the mouths of five calves in rural Southampton in 2006, claiming a grand jury couldn’t infer whether the cows had been “tormented” or “puzzled” by the situation or even irritated that they’d been duped out of a meal.

“If the cow had the cognitive ability to form thought and speak, would it say, ‘Where’s the milk? I’m not getting any milk,’ ” Judge James J. Morley asked.

Got milk? Or milky discharge?

Children, Morley said, seemed “comforted” when given pacifiers, but there’s no way to know what bovine minds thought of Robert Melia Jr. substituting his member for a cow’s teat.

“They [children] enjoy the act of suckling,” the judge said. “Cows may be of a different disposition.”

In its weirdness, this is all very Ally McBeal-ish (although too explicit for that show).

So, how did the prosecutor feel about all of this?

If Michael Vick can learn to love animals, “be they a dog, or a cat, or … a reptile,” then surely the American courts can’t be far behind.

A couple of weeks ago, we brought you the story of a New Jersey appellate panel which declined to view the family pet as mere property in a divorce proceeding. Now a Virginia court is being asked to award damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress stemming from a pet-icide. The Wall Street Journal reports that there is some high profile pro-bono legal counsel taking up the cause of not treating animals as replaceable goods:

A lawsuit slated to go to trial next week down in Virginia could help redefine the theory — at least in that state — on what how a pet-owner should be compensated if a pet is wrongfully killed. In many states, tort law provides the owner simply gets the replacement value of a pet.

But the plaintiff in the Virginia case, represented pro bono by Orrick partner and former White House counsel Lanny Davis, feels the amount should be much higher in certain circumstances. Davis likened the case to that of a family heirloom, which has worth well beyond its street value.

Go Orrick. Family heirloom status is just the first step. It won’t be long now until I can bring my dog into the Duane Reade with the same disregard for other people’s shopping experience as parents enjoy now with their no spatial awareness/no vocal modulation street urchins.

Either that or we’ll soon see strollers tied up to stop signs up and down the east side of Manhattan.

After the jump, even the defendant in the civil suit agrees that family pets are worth more than their store bought value.

You’ve heard horror stories about messy divorces where people litigate over the family pet. Traditionally, pets are regarded as just another piece of property to be divided up among the former spouses. But that could be about to change. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports:

[A] second trial on the custody of the nearly six-year-old brown pooch is set to begin. [Doreen Houseman] plans to testify again that her ex-fiancé broke an oral agreement to let her have the dog after she moved out of their house.

In March, a three-judge appeals panel ordered a new trial, saying Superior Court Judge John Tomasello should not have treated Dexter as just another piece of furniture during the first trial, in Gloucester County, in 2007

Houseman argued against the speciesist system where pets are considered mere property by family courts. Houseman and various animal defense lawyers tried to use the Michael Vick case as precedent:

They suggested the judge should also weigh what was best for the dog. That had been done, they said, with the dogs that belonged to former Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, after he was involved in a dog-fighting ring.

The appellate panel declined to go so far as to apply the best interests test to a dog. Apparently, tail wags per minute is not a reliable indicator.

But the panel didn’t have to apply a best interests test. The trial court judge seemed to be just enough of a jerk to give the appellate court grounds to give Houseman a new trial.

More details after the jump.

The recently released Michael Vick can expect no quarter from most animal lovers. I forget how long he was in jail, but if his sentence didn’t involve a dog biting him in the ass every day, then it wasn’t long enough.

But Vick is (or was) merely a retailer in the world of inhumane treatment of animals. The real outrage should be directed at the wholesalers. And that is just what Weil Gotshal appears to be doing. The firm won a major victory against the alleged puppy mill Wizard of Claws, in Broward County Circuit Court:

The Broward County Circuit Court has issued a ruling refusing to dismiss several defendants from a major class action lawsuit against a south Florida puppy dealer known as “Wizard of Claws.” The suit, filed in 2007, accuses Wizard of Claws, its owners, and its affiliates of defrauding customers by misrepresenting the origin of puppies, and by selling puppy mill dogs who suffer from severe health problems and genetic defects.

The court’s order allows plaintiffs to proceed with their claims against three entities sharing common ownership with Wizard of Claws — Celebrity Kennels, Inc., Dog Breeder Kennel, Inc. and Puppies for Sale, Inc. — and also directs the defendants to turn over records regarding the puppies they have sold to the public. The court also ordered the owners of Wizard of Claws to sit for depositions concerning their business practices.

This victory has been a long time coming for lawyers at Weil Gotshal. More details after the jump.

A court in the Indian state of Bihar is putting a dog on trial. It’s not the first time “Chhotu” has been in trouble with the law. He was sentenced to death in 2003, but he must have a good lawyer, as he managed to get out of the death penalty.

Here’s the tale of doggy-style justice from BBC News:

“The court was compelled to issue a summons to the dog since the police found that it was a threat to peace and feared that it might create a law and order problem,” district official Rajiv Ranjan said.

In court Chhotu appeared to have been on best behaviour.

“Despite the presence of so many people in the courtroom the dog did not bite or bark at anyone,” the canine’s lawyer Dilip Kumar Deepak said in defence of his client.

The case continues and Chhotu has been ordered to appear in court again on 5 August, together with his owner, childless widow, Rajkumari Devi.

Prepare yourself for obligatory terrible dog-related joke…

It sounds like the case is all bark and no bite.

Dog in court for breaching peace [BBC News]

A woman in Missouri says the scary-looking bonnet macaque (see specimen at right) helps her social anxiety disorder. Having that thing in our arms would increase our anxiety immensely, but to each their own.

Local health officials apparently share our anxiety. They allegedly banned the monkey from grocery stores and restaurants, including Wal-Mart. From the Kansas City Star:

A southwest Missouri woman has sued Wal-Mart, local health officials and Cox Health Systems, claiming they discriminated against her and her monkey named Richard.

Debby Rose of Springfield said in the lawsuit that the 10-year-old bonnet macaque helps curb a social anxiety disorder that can cause her to have panic attacks in public.

We’re no experts in naming monkeys, but “Richard” seems like a horrible monkey name. We’d have a lot more respect for this woman and her suit if her monkey were named “Bananas” or “Bobo.” But that’s off-topic.

Rose’s suit claims that the local health department decided that the monkey was not a legitimate service animal and told establishments not to admit her and her little monkey. Was the problem that the “service animal” is a monkey, or that social anxiety disorder is a questionable disability?

We’d try to sort it out, but we’re still schoolgirl-giggling over “macaque named Dick.”

Springfield woman’s lawsuit alleges discrimination against her monkey [Kansas City Star]

Recently we’ve been thinking about law-related names for racehorses. The subject came up when we were reading about how Big Brown, the 2008 Kentucky Derby winner, might win the Triple Crown and join the company of Affirmed (pictured) — the last winner of the Triple Crown, in 1978.

Hearing about a racing horse named “Affirmed” led us to start thinking about other legally-themed horse names. A few ideas:

— “Reversed” (or “Reversed and Remanded”)

We liked how it played off of “Affirmed.” But it’s “probably not the kind of message you want to send to the oddsmakers,” said a friend.

— “Cert Denied”

Kinda badass, no? We’ll put it down as a possibility.

— “GVR”

Suggested by another friend, to continue on the Supreme Court disposition theme. “GVR” stands for “Grant, Vacate, and Remand” — which can, depending on the circumstances, be something of a benchslap. But maybe it’s too technical, appreciated only by SCOTUS junkies?

— “Desuetude”

Nominated by a third friend (in the midst of studying for law-school finals). It’s erudite, but a bit short on sex appeal.

Have an idea for a law-related racehorse name, à la Affirmed? If so, feel free to leave it in the comments. If we get enough nominations, maybe we’ll hold a contest. Also, feel free to weigh in on the names previously mentioned, if you strong feelings about any of them.

Update: Please make sure that your nomination complies with these naming rules (posted by a helpful commenter).

Further Update: Okay, we’ve reached the 400-comment mark on this post, so we’re closing the thread. Poll to follow shortly.

More about racehorses and the law, after the jump.

Unless you’ve always wanted an Australian accent. From the Telegraph:

A New Zealand man who claimed he was raped by a wombat and that the experience left him speaking with an Australian accent has been found guilty of wasting police time.

Arthur Cradock, 48, from the South Island town of Motueka, called police last month to tell them he was being raped by the marsupial at his home and needed urgent assistance.

Cradock, an orchard worker, later called back to reassure the police operator that he was all right.

“I’ll retract the rape complaint from the wombat, because he’s pulled out. Apart from speaking Australian now, I’m pretty all right you know. I didn’t hurt my bum at all.”

Wombats are very considerate; they use lots of lube. We learned that on Animal Planet.

[Cradock] pleaded guilty in Nelson District Court to using a phone for a fictitious purpose and was sentenced to 75 hours’ community work….

Wombats are native to Australia and are not found in New Zealand. Although powerfully built and about the size of a small pig, they are very rarely dangerous. There are three species: the widely distributed common wombat and the much rarer southern and northern hairy-nosed wombats.

Now wasn’t that informative? You can bill 0.1 hour to “Professional Development” for reading this.

Man said ‘wombat rape’ led to accent change [UK Telegraph]

In the wake of this story, which had a happy ending, we received this email:

I read about you helping the woman with cancer who wanted to wear her hat in court.

I’m handicapped, paralyzed with a closed head injury.

I’m in a wheelchair and rarely leave my condo except to see doctors.

I’ve lived in my condo since August 1989. I brought the bird feeder from Mom’s house after she died.

Now Ms. [xxxx], the new Property Manager, has ordered me to get rid of my water and chipmunk ramp.

I’ve been here 18 years. She’s been here less than a year.

My whole outside world is my patio with the bird feeder, and water and chipmunk ramp.

I have appealed to [xxxx] Management in Buffalo Grove, IL, but they won’t help me.

I hope you will.

We’re much better at helping Biglaw associates secure pay raises, or law clerks snag clerkship bonuses. The law governing whether a Chicago condo tenant is entitled to keep a chipmunk ramp on her patio lies outside our expertise. Also, we’re not admitted in Illinois.

But if you’re a landlord / tenant lawyer in Illinois who might be willing to help our correspondent, please email us, and we will put you in touch with her. Thanks.

* Gov. Romney wins Michigan. [CNN]

* Sen. Clinton faces challenge from “uncommitted.” [CNN]

* NV Supreme Court overturns decision allowing Rep. Kucinich to debate. [MSNBC]

* Criminal prosecutions of Blackwater security guards would not be easy. [New York Times]

* Did CIA lawyers and officials implicitly sign off on the destruction of interrogation tapes? [Washington Post]

* Austrian court rules animal rights group can’t have custody of chimp; appeal will be to the European Court of Human Rights. [AP]

* DOJ to investigate Tejada? [New York Times]

* Collected news coverage about yesterday’s Stoneridge decision. [How Appealing (linkwrap)]

* Rest in peace, Benazir Bhutto; God knows you weren’t able to live in it. [CNN]

* That seems like a pretty good starting point for liability against the zoo. [BBC]

* We don’t know if you know Tom Goldstein, but he’s a pretty big deal. [SCOTUSBlog]

* If he could only apply all of that genius to acquiring some money to actually make a mortgage payment… [WSJ Law Blog]

* Crazy pro se lawsuit against Google, seeking $5 billion in damages, touches upon the war on terror and a Burton snowboard. And no, it wasn’t filed by Jonathan Lee Riches. [TechDirt]

* A misdemeanor count of cruelty to animals? Guess he wasn’t that good. [Denver Channel]

* Law professors get their academic gowns in a wad over the gender divide in faculty hiring. [TaxProf Blog]

* Dewey LeBoeuf? Already done it. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Debevoise & Plimpton lords it over the competition. [Times of London]

Well, not in Illinois. In Cavel International v. Madigan (PDF; via How Appealing), the Seventh Circuit upheld an Illinois law making it unlawful to “slaughter a horse if that person knows or should know that any of the horse meat will be used for human consumption.”

It’s a quirky and interesting case. Howard Bashman provides a concise summary and more discussion over here.

Don’t miss page 11 of Judge Richard Posner’s slip opinion, which features a photograph of a “birthday cake” made of horse meat. YUM!!

Cavel Int’l v. Madigan (PDF) [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit]
Horse meat was until recently an accepted part of the American diet [How Appealing]

News of an amusing appellate decision, from that leading source of legal news, ESPN:

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a filly can’t be named “Sally Hemings” after Thomas Jefferson’s most famous slave and reputed lover.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled that the Jockey Club can legally bar horse owner Garrett Redmond from naming his 4-year-old horse after Hemings.

We can understand the Sixth Circuit’s reluctance to allow anyone to “ride Sally Hemings.” Thomas Jefferson already tried that, and his historical reputation will never be the same.

But the court’s decision was grounded in law as well as good taste:

Judge Alice Batchelder, writing for the three-judge panel, said Redmond has other options that may be approved by the Jockey Club, which forbids horse owners from using names of famous or notorious people without special permission.

No “famous or notorious” people? So much for Redmond’s fallback option, “Wanda Sykes.”

Did being denied this name of choice have an adverse effect on the horse’s performance? Quite possibly:

The horse, now known as “Awaiting Justice,” ran at Churchill Downs on July 1 and at Ellis Park in Henderson on July 25. She did not finish in the top 3 in either race.

A little more discussion, after the jump.

From ESPN.com (gavel bang: commenter):

In another [Michael] Vick-related matter, the quarterback’s camp has begun interviewing candidates to beef up his legal defense team in the event he goes to trial [on federal charges of conspiracy related to an alleged dogfighting venture].

Vick’s longtime personal attorney, Lawrence Woodward, is expected to remain part of the defense team, but advisors have urged that the Falcons star consider adding counsel with experience in the federal courts.

The Vick camp has solicited recommendations and is believed to have interviewed at least one prominent defender from the prestigious Washington, D.C., firm of Wilmer Hale.

And from a second commenter:

WilmerHale for Vick? Wow, doesn’t seem like a dog-fighting defense shop. They do white collar defense, but that’s a different ball game. From their website: “We have defended clients against allegations of insider trading; securities, healthcare, accounting and government contracts fraud; criminal antitrust violations; money laundering; and alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other statutes.”

So, any speculation as to which WilmerHale lawyer is being considered by Team Vick? Or a recommendation of a top “dog-fighting defense shop” for the embattled sports star?

NFL, Falcons could ask Vick to focus energies in court [ESPN.com]

* According to a lawsuit filed by fellow blogger David Oscar Markus, you have a First Amendment right to cocks on the internets. [Althouse; Volokh Conspiracy]

* In other odd legal news from Florida, Holland & Knight has discovered a new practice area: “suing Little League back to the Stone Age.” [St. Petersburg Times via Deadspin]

* Still more Florida weirdness. Avoid wearing black in this judge’s courtroom. [Daily Business Review]

* Speaking of fashion, should federal judges be provided with clip-on ties? Sadly, it might mark a style improvement for many. [Underbelly]

An interesting and odd observation about law firm ad campaigns, from Copyranter:

What The F**k is up with all the law firms using goofy animal symbolism? Dykema thinks it’s a giraffe amongst zebras. Zuckerman Spaeder says I’m a canary threatened by a lion.

And Bingham McCutchen (above) was, first, a lion-chasing zebra (where does the Dykema giraffe fit into this equation?) and now, a baby-coddling grizzly bear. Hey, if any of you crows want to see an idea using puffins, drop me a line.

(All ads scanned from the Wall Street Journal, the bear ad from yesterday’s edition.)

A commenter at Copyranter offers some great suggested captions for the Bingham ad. To read them all, click here. Our personal favorite:

“Bear lawyers who accept babies as payment.”

What, no sharks or leeches? [copyranter]

* ATL readers, meet Modern Bride of the Year, future defender of battered women. [Modern Bride; lots of “In Defense of”s in Slate’s Wedding Report] [FN1]

* I hate to repeat myself and every other local politician, but what do you expect from New York City public school teachers? (I mean, what does it say when an atheist donates millions to help the needy send their kids to parochial schools?) [CBS News]

* Even highly evolved, quietly progressive Sweden is not immune to the realities of displacement. [New York Times]

* Feel free to direct your anger at me, but foie gras is a traditional part of my family’s Christmas spread. I blame over- and mass-production for the spectacular extent of bad press. How would you feel if turkey were outlawed? And what happened to the veal controversy? I’m glad I don’t live in Chicago. [Fox News]

* Paris has famously vowed not to act stupid anymore, but she should put her money where her mouth is. Sadly, Tehran will probably nix the idea of The Simple Life: Behind the Burqa. [CNN]

[FN1] Brides and grooms-to-be, please forgive me for this gratuitous laugh at your expense. But I can’t help myself, and somehow I am comforted that such sentiment does not spring from bitterness or a Gawker-esque superiority/inferiority complex. I’m just in a state of utter disbelief that earnestness seems genetically intertwined with blondeness and nasality.

* Wow, talk about passive-aggressive behavior. (The husband, not the wife.) [Island Packet]

* The FTC may be good at many things, but creative punny language is not one of them. [Truth on the Market]

* Sexual harassment: once a dog, always a dog. [Reuters / Oddly Enough]

* I blame the same wiring responsible for guys’ breasts-as-stimuli reaction for the double take on that guy with the Che Guevara neck tatt. Reflex trumps judgment. [Agoraphilia]

* Sports agent busted for smuggling Cuban baseball players. [ESPN]

* Is your bar licence up to date? [Law.com]

* So a lawyer, an “oilman,” and a donkey named Buddy walk into a courtroom… [MSNBC]

* Ohio strippers have to learn new dance steps. [AP via Dispatch]

* UNC’s soccer coach uses some really rough language, as does the 4th Circuit. [ABA Journal e-report]