A1822 —

A1822 AAN1R Statement[First 3/11/19Reprint] ASSEMBLY AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE   STATEMENT TO   ASSEMBLY, No.

1822  STATE withOF committeeNEW amendmentsJERSEY 218th LEGISLATURE   STATEPRE-FILED OFFOR NEWINTRODUCTION JERSEYIN THE 2018 SESSION   DATED:  Sponsored by:

 MARCHAssemblyman  11,GORDON 2019M.         The Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee favorably reports, and with committee amendments, Assembly Bill No.

1822.JOHNSON District 37 (Bergen) Assemblyman  TIM EUSTACE District 38 (Bergen and Passaic) Assemblywoman  CAROL A.

     MURPHY ThisDistrict bill,7 as(Burlington) amended,Assemblyman  revisesBENJIE theE. current law concerning vicious and potentially dangerous dogs.

     WIMBERLY TheDistrict bill,35 as(Bergen amended, removes the requirement that the municipal court (court) is required to declare a dog vicious if it finds that the dog has engaged in certain dog fighting activities, and thePassaic) dog  posesCo-Sponsored aby: threat of serious bodily injury or death to a person.  The bill, as amended, also authorizes the court to order:

     Assemblywoman (1) Reynolds-Jackson the  owner  of  a  viciousSYNOPSIS dog     toRevises complycriteria withfor certaindetermining restrictionswhether thatdog areis atvicious leastor as stringent as those imposed on potentially dangerousdangerous. dogs in order to protect the public;

or       CURRENT (2) VERSION aOF viciousTEXT dog     toAs bereported euthanizedby inthe aAssembly humaneAgriculture and expeditiousNatural manner.Resources Committee on March 11, 2019, with amendments.

       TheAn bill,Act asconcerning amended,vicious removesdogs aand provision under current law that requires the court to declare a dog to be declared potentially dangerous ifdogs, the dog has been trained, tormented, badgered, baited, or encouraged to engage in unprovoked attacks on domestic animals.  The bill, as amended, also clarifies that a court would declare a dog potentially dangerous if it finds by clear and convincingamending evidenceP.L.1989, thatc.307. the dog:

       (1)      causedBe bodilyIt injuryEnacted toby athe personSenate during an unprovoked attack, and posesGeneral aAssembly serious threat of seriousthe bodilyState injuryof orNew deathJersey: to a person;

or            (2) 1[1.    causedSection serious bodily injury to another domestic animal or killed another domestic animal, and       (a)  poses a serious threat of seriousP.L.1989, bodilyc.307 injury(C.4:19-22) oris deathamended to aread person,as orfollows:       (b)  poses a serious threat of death to another domestic animal.

           6.   a.   The bill,municipal ascourt amended,shall alsodeclare prohibitsthe dog vicious if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the courtdog:  from     declaring(1)  killed a dogperson toor becaused potentiallyserious dangerousbodily for:injury as defined in [N.J.S.2C:11-1(b)] subsection b.

      (1)  causing bodily injury to a person who was committing or attempting to commit a crime or offense upon the owner or person with custody or control of theN.J.S.2C:11-1 dog or committing or attempting to commit a trespassperson; or other criminal offense on the owner or person with custody or control of the dog;

     or  (2)      causing(2)   bodily[has injuryengaged toin adog personfighting oractivities aas domesticdescribed animalin whoR.S.4:22-24 wasand abusing,R.S.4:22-26, assaulting,and orposes physicallya threateningthreat theof dogserious bodily injury or death to a person] (Deleted by amendment, P.L.    ,  c.      ) (pending before the dog’sLegislature offspring;as this bill).

or           b.   (3) A causingdog bodilyshall injurynot tobe adeclared personvicious whofor wasinflicting interveningdeath betweenor twoserious orbodily moreinjury dogsas engageddefined in aggressive[N.J.S.2C:11-1(b)] behaviorsubsection orb. fighting.

     of Also,N.J.S.2C:11-1 asupon reporteda withperson if the committeedog amendments,was provoked.  The municipality shall bear the billburden of proof to demonstrate that the dog was not provoked.        c.    If the municipal court declares a dog to be vicious, and no appeal is identicalmade of this ruling pursuant to Senatesection Bill9 No.of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-25), the court may order:

1923     (1R)(1)   the dog’s owner to comply with certain restrictions to protect the public that are at least as reportedstringent byas the committee.requirements for potentially dangerous dogs pursuant to section 8 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-24) and section 12 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-28);

 or COMMITTEE     AMENDMENTS:(2)   the dog [shall] to be [destroyed] euthanized in a humane and expeditious manner, except that no dog may be [destroyed] euthanized during the pendency of an appeal.  (cf:

     P.L.1994, Thec.187, committees.3)]1 amendments:       1[2.    Section of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-23) is amended to read as follows:

(1)       clarify 7.   thea.   termsThe “bodilymunicipal injury”court andshall “seriousdeclare bodilya injury”dog into thebe billpotentially anddangerous theif court’sit applicationfinds ofby theclear termsand whenconvincing determiningevidence whetherthat athe dogdog: is vicious or potentially dangerous;

(2)       clarifies(1)   whencaused abodily courtinjury wouldas declaredefined ain dog[N.J.S.2C:11-1(a)] tosubsection bea. potentially dangerous;

of N.J.S.2C:11-1 to a person during an unprovoked attack, and (3)  poses makea theserious billthreat identicalof bodily injury, serious bodily injury, or death to Senatea Billperson No.[,] ;

1923or (1R).     (2)   [severely injured or killed another domestic animal, and      (a)   poses a threat of serious bodily injury or death to a person;

or      (b)   poses a threat of death to another domestic animal, or] (Deleted by amendment, P.L.    ,  c.   ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill)      (3)   has been trained, tormented, badgered, baited, or encouraged to engage in unprovoked attacks upon persons [or domestic animals].

      b.   A dog shall not be declared potentially dangerous for:

     (1)   causing bodily injury as defined in [N.J.S.2C:11-1(a)] subsection a.

of N.J.S.2C:11-1 to a person if the dog was provoked [or,] ;

     (2)   severely injuring or killing a domestic animal if the domestic animal was the aggressor;

     (3)   causing bodily injury to a person who was committing or attempting to commit a crime or offense upon the owner or person with custody or control of the dog or committing or attempting to commit a trespass or other criminal offense on the property of the owner or person with custody or control of the dog;

     (4)   causing bodily injury to a person or a domestic animal who was abusing, assaulting, or physically threatening the dog or the dog’s offspring;

or      (5)   causing bodily injury to a person who was intervening between two or more dogs engaged in aggressive behavior or fighting.

     For the purposes of paragraph (1) of this subsection, the municipality shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the dog was not provoked.

(cf:

P.L.2002, c.24, s.1)]1        11.   Section of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-22) is amended to read as follows:

      6.   a.   The municipal court shall declare the dog vicious if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the dog:       (1)   killed a person or caused serious bodily injury [as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b)] to a person;

or       (2)   [has engaged in dog fighting activities as described in R.S.4:22-24 and R.S.4:22-26, and poses a threat of serious bodily injury or death to a person] (Deleted by amendment, P.L.    ,  c.      ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill).

      b.   A dog shall not be declared vicious for inflicting death or serious bodily injury [as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b)] upon a person if the dog was provoked.

The municipality shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the dog was not provoked.        c.    If the municipal court declares a dog to be vicious, and no appeal is made of this ruling pursuant to section 9 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-25), the court may order:

     (1)   the dog’s owner to comply with certain restrictions to protect the public that are at least as stringent as the requirements for potentially dangerous dogs pursuant to section 8 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-24) and section 12 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-28);

or      (2)   the dog [shall] to be [destroyed] euthanized in a humane and expeditious manner, except that no dog may be [destroyed] euthanized during the pendency of an appeal.