CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 650599
...The only substantial difference between the instant case and Stanfield is that in Stanfield, the salvation Army contractually obligated itself to perform governmental services which otherwise would have had to be performed by Marion County. In the instant case, the provisions of sections *1240
828.03 and
828.073 [2] authorize the Society, but do not compel it, to perform the governmental function....
...Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Groups, Inc.,
596 So.2d 1029, 1031 (Fla.1992). We affirm the trial court's order requiring the Society to make available the records that were created and maintained in connection with the acts of its investigative functions pursuant to section 823.03 and
828.073, Florida Statutes....
...ge or the judge of circuit court for the county, and the mayor or judge shall keep a record of such appointment. The approval of any agent by a county for either the incorporated or unincorporated areas of a county shall be by the county commission. Section 828.073 provides in pertinent part: Animals found in distress; when agents may take charge; hearings; disposition; sale. (1) The purpose of this section is to provide a means by which a neglected or mistreated animal can be: a) Removed from...
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 642284
...n against Popeye. With regard to the Humane Society, if it acted independently and seized Popeye pursuant to a civil complaint based on animal cruelty, then the right to possess the dog should be resolved by complying with the procedure set forth in section 828.073, Florida Statutes (1993), by the Society's filing a petition with the county court and obtaining a prompt hearing....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2000 WL 1513758
...e actually penetrating the paw pads. Approximately twenty-five veterinarians were engaged to address the dogs' health maladies. The County sought to enjoin the Brinkleys from mistreating animals again by filing a petition against the Brinkleys under section 828.073, Florida Statutes (1997). The trial court found the Brinkleys were unfit and unable to adequately provide for the animals as proscribed by section 828.073 and ordered that the animals be turned over to the Flagler County Humane Society for appropriate placement and disposition....
...She argues this evidence was obtained without a warrant *471 allegedly resulting in an illegal search and seizure in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution and Florida law. [1] The animals on the Brinkleys' property were removed pursuant to section 828.073, a statute giving law enforcement officers and duly appointed humane society agents the right to provide care to animals in distress. The initial determination to be made is whether the Fourth Amendment is applicable to section 828.073....
...Generally, a forfeiture is a loss of some right or property as a penalty for some illegal act or because of breach of a legal obligation. See Black's Law Dictionary 585 (7th ed.1999). It is undisputed that the animals seized in the instant case were considered the Brinkleys' personal property. Section 828.073 provides for the removal of neglected or mistreated animals and the eventual transfer of custody to a Humane Society if the owner is deemed unable or unfit to adequately provide for them. See Fla. Stat. §§ 828.073(1)(a) & (4)(c)2 (1997). The statute further provides for the enjoinment of the owner from further possession or custody of other animals if warranted. See Fla. Stat. § 828.073(4)(c)4. Accordingly, because section 828.073 contemplates the loss of an unfit owner's right to possession or custody of his or her animal due to the neglect or mistreatment of that animal, we find that an action brought pursuant to this section constitutes a forfeiture action and is protected by the Fourth Amendment....
...Accordingly, we find that entry onto the Brinkleys' property under these circumstances was constitutionally permitted. See generally State v. Bauer, 127 Wis.2d 401, 379 N.W.2d 895 (1985), rev. denied, 129 Wis.2d 550, 388 N.W.2d 185 (1986). Brinkley alternatively argues that because section 828.073 fails to provide for a preliminary hearing prior to seizure, it deprived her of property without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution....
...ent rendered after trial". Id. at 873. In the instant case, we find that Brinkley received a full hearing on the issue of whether the animals in question should be taken from her custody within the 60 day period prescribed by statute. See Fla. Stat. § 828.073(2)....
...e cost of the animal's care. See Pet Fair, Inc. v. Humane Soc. of Greater Miami,
583 So.2d 407 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Accordingly, we conclude that Brinkley was not deprived of her property without due process, that the post-seizure hearing provided by section
828.073 adequately protected her due process rights, and that a pre-seizure hearing was not necessary. Brinkley argues further that the statute is constitutionally infirm because it authorizes the trial court to "enjoin the owner's further possession or custody of other animals." See Fla. Stat. §
828.073(4)(c)4....
...The statute specifically provides that "[i]f the evidence indicates a lack of proper and reasonable care of the animal, the burden is on the owner to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he is able and fit to have custody *473 of and provide adequately for the animal." Fla. Stat. § 828.073(6)....
...We have no trouble in applying these words and phrases to determine whether Brinkley should be privileged to have custody of animals in the future. Next, Brinkley complains that it was error to transfer the case from county court to the circuit court for a hearing on the county's motion for costs because section 828.073 clearly establishes jurisdiction in the county court. Section 828.073(2)(b) requires that the county court determine whether adequate care has been provided and whether the owner is fit to have custody of the animals. The county court fulfilled that duty. However, Brinkley overlooks section 828.073(4)(c)3, which provides: "Upon proof of costs incurred by the agent or officer, the court may require that the owner pay for the care of the animal while in the custody of the agent or officer....
...whether the owner, if known, is able to provide adequately for the animal and is fit to have custody of the animal. The hearing shall be concluded and the court order entered thereon within 60 days after the date the hearing is commenced. Relying on section 828.073(2)(b), Brinkley argues that because the order imposing costs was not entered within 60 days of the hearing on care and fitness, the order is untimely and the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter it. Again she overlooks section 828.073(4)(c)3, which expressly provides for a separate hearing on the issue of costs and, unlike section 828.073(2)(b), there is no time limit established for the hearing on costs....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1996 WL 238686
...Jacqueline Lovelace, d/b/a Lovelace Farms, operates a dog breeding and kennel business. In 1994, Lovelace filed for an injunction to prevent the County's Animal Services Department from closing her kennel or seizing her dogs. The County brought a counterclaim under section 828.073, Florida Statutes (1993), seeking an order to provide care....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7344, 1991 WL 139157
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge. Pursuant to section 828.073, Florida Statutes (1989), the Metro-Dade Police Department seized allegedly neglected or mistreated domestic animals from their owner, the appellant, Pet Fair, Inc. Metro turned them over for care and treatment to the appellee, the Humane Society. The county court then found on disputed evidence in favor of Pet Fair, that it was in fact able adequately to provide for the animals. Therefore, pursuant to 828.073(4)(a)l, 1 it was ordered that the animal[s] shall be returned to the owner upon payment by the owner for the care and provision for the animal[s] while in the agent’s or officer’s custody....
...in the first place. See 3A C.J.S. Animals § 341 (1973) (“The right of the poundkeeper to his fees may be lost ... where [he] fail[s] to proceed with his duties in the statutory manner_”). Apparently the appellee proceeded under the provision in 828.073(4)(c)3 that the court may require that the owner pay for the care of the animal while in the custody of the agent or officer. Unfortunately, that remedy is available only [u]pon the court’s judgment that the owner of the animal is unable or unfit to adequately provide for the animal. § 828.073(4)(c), Fla.Stat....
...Delcastillo,
386 So.2d 1259, 1267-68 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), review denied,
397 So.2d 778 (Fla.1981); Keyes Co. v. Sens,
382 So.2d 1273, 1276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Accordingly, the judgment below is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint. Reversed. .
828.073(4)(a)l provides: (4)(a) The officer or agent of any county or of any society or association for the prevention of cruelty to animals taking charge of an animal as provided for in this section shall provide for the animal until either: 1....
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1978).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
...828, F. S., or any other law of the state for the purpose of protecting animals or preventing any act of cruelty thereto. This law does not vest such agents with arrest powers, nor does it designate them to be peace officers or conservators of the peace. Section 828.073 (2), F....
...(1976 Supp.), authorizes such animal control agents to take custody of neglected or cruelly treated animals, and to petition the county judge for a hearing to determine the owner's fitness to have custody of such animals and ability to provide adequately for the animal. Section 828.073 (3), F....
...by the sheriff or a special process server appointed by the sheriff. Section
48.021 , F. S. (1976 Supp.). This section does not empower an animal control agent to serve such notice; he or she only causes the notice to be served. Finally, nothing in s.
828.073 , F....
...neglected or cruelly treated animal or to arrest him for a criminal violation, to issue notices to appear in lieu of physical arrest, or to serve notices in the nature of civil process upon animal owners in animal custody proceedings provided for in s. 828.073 , F....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 549, 2011 WL 222342
...The same motion was also the subject of this court’s published decision reversing Rodriguez’s related criminal conviction. The Palm Beach County Division of Animal Care and Control filed a petition in the county court seeking forfeiture of Rodriguez’s animals pursuant to section 828.073, Florida Statutes (2007)....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 272, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 274, 1988 WL 4029
...Second, because the removal of the animals from Standifer’s farm merely ousted him from his right to custody and did not in the least affect his ownership interest, his suit against the Humane Society lies where he has alleged, albeit inartfully, that the Humane Society was unjustly enriched by the sale. 3 According to Section 828.073(6), Florida Statutes (1985) (although applicable by its terms to auctions only), the Humane Society may retain only the expenses it has incurred in respect to the sale, care, and provision for the animals, with the remainder to go to the owner....
...c. is one entity. The statute authorizing the court to remand neglected or mistreated animals to the custody of such an organization refers to the Humane Society and the S.P.C.A. as separate entities, as they may be in other Florida communities. See § 828.073(4)(b)2, Fla.Stat....
