Texas House Bill HB963

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 1/27/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/27/11
• Voted on by House: 5/15/11
• Refer: 2/28/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/21/11
• Report Pass: 4/18/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/24/11
• Engrossed: 5/15/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 5/16/11
• Report Pass: 5/21/11
• Enrolled: 5/24/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the costs associated with proceedings regarding cruelly treated animals.

Impact

The implications of HB 963 are significant for both animal welfare organizations and the judicial system. The bill mandates that any animal owner who is found to have treated their animal cruelly must pay all associated costs, which may include investigation and impoundment fees. This could provide financial relief to municipal or county shelters and nonprofit organizations that handle these animals, ensuring that those responsible for neglect or cruelty also bear the financial burden of their actions. Such provisions are expected to encourage responsible pet ownership and reduce incidents of cruelty.

Summary

House Bill 963 focuses on the legal proceedings and associated costs in cases involving cruelly treated animals. The bill amends the Health and Safety Code, specifically Section 821.021, to clearly define terms such as 'cruelly treated' and 'nonprofit animal welfare organization.' It ensures that if an owner is found guilty of cruel treatment, they will face specific legal consequences, including the payment of all court costs related to the case. This includes administrative costs for investigation, expert witnesses, and the care of the animal during impoundment.

Contention

While the bill is framed as a necessary step towards enhancing animal welfare, some may argue about the fairness of imposing substantial costs on animal owners who are found guilty without considering their financial situation. Critics could voice concerns regarding the administrative feasibility of determining these costs, as well as the impact on individuals who may not have the resources to cover such expenses. Furthermore, there may be discussions surrounding the efficient enforcement of these regulations and whether they provide adequate protection for animals without overburdening the judicial system.