Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-01-2013 - 7a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2013
>
Agenda - 10-01-2013 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 10-01-2013 - 7a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/11/2015 4:18:11 PM
Creation date
9/27/2013 11:40:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/1/2013
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7a
Document Relationships
Minutes 10-01-2013
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
17 <br />should be an appeal process for vicious animals and proposed that it should be in the <br />Ordinance. (See 111.3. above) <br />b. Dangerous and Vicious Dog Declaration. North Carolina General Statute §67 -4.5 authorizes <br />local governments to enact laws in addition to the ones found in the North Carolina General <br />Statues. Neither the "vicious dog" declaration under the county ordinance nor the <br />"dangerous" or "potentially dangerous" dog declarations under state law are new. The <br />vicious dog designation is a part of the County Ordinance and a part of the Chapel Hill <br />Ordinance. The added language in the Unified Ordinance incorporates language from the <br />Chapel Hill and Carrboro Ordinances. (See Section 111.7 above) <br />c. Trespass definition puts the onus on the property owner to prove the intruder came onto <br />the property with criminal intent. The current definition of "vicious animal" ( §4 -37) in the <br />County Ordinance provides the following: <br />"Any animal on or off the premises of its owner or keeper, security dog excluded, which <br />animal is three months of age or older and without provocation has bitten, or killed, or <br />caused physical harm through bites to people (a person) who are (is) not trespassing <br />and or has bitten or killed an animal(s) that is (are) not where its (their) owner(s) has <br />(have) been told such animal(s) cannot be. Any dog that is owned or harbored for the <br />purpose of dog fighting or training for dog fighting is also defined as a vicious animal." <br />§4 -37 (emphasis added) <br />Neither the County nor Towns Ordinances currently define the term "trespass." The North 5 <br />Carolina General Statutes lists a variety of types of trespasses based on whether the nature <br />of the act is either civil or criminal. One of the many definitions of "trespasser" in Black's <br />Law Dictionary (91h ed. 2009), is "one who intentionally and without consent or privilege <br />enters another's property." Because the definition of trespass is open to many definitions, <br />the definition of a trespasser in Black's Law is followed by an admonition: <br />"The word 'trespasser' has an ugly sound, but it covers the wicked and the innocent. The <br />burglar and the arrogant squatter are trespassers, but so are all sorts of comparatively <br />innocent and respectable persons such as a walker in the countryside who unhindered strolls <br />across an open field. Perhaps much of the trouble in this area has arisen from 'the simplistic <br />stereotype' of the definition. The courts are therefore beginning to recognize that the duty of <br />the occupier may vary according to the nature of the trespasser." R.F.V. Heuston, Salmond <br />on the Law of Torts 278 (17th ed. 1977). TRESPASSER, Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed. 2009), <br />trespasser <br />Recognizing the definition of the word "trespasser" may be open to interpretation, language <br />consistent with the N.C. Gen. Stat. § 67 -4.1 (Dangerous Dog Statute) and Carrboro <br />Ordinance was added to the Unified Ordinance. This language provides for an exception in <br />the Unified Ordinance for dogs that bite persons considered trespassers. The following <br />exception appears in the Unified Ordinance: <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.