Doggie Due Process
The Saga of "Tut-Tut," "Bandit," "Boo
Boo," and "Sadie"
Altman v. City of High Point, N.C., 330 F.3d
194 (4th Cir.(N.C.) 2003)






What is a dog "at large"
What happened to plaintiff's dog?
Where was this done?
Why was this done?
What due process was provided?
How did plaintiff characterize the act in legal
terms?
Plaintiff's Legal Claims



Plaintiff claims under 42 USC 1983
 Violation of a person's civil rights under the
color of law
Whose rights are violated?
What is the constitutional claim, i.e., what part of
the constitution has been violated?
The Characterization of a Dog




What is the legal classification issue that plaintiff must
address to state a 42 USC 1983 claim?
Does the Constitution mention dogs?
What class of animal does a dog fall into?
 Is it an animal ferae naturae?
 Is it the same as a cow?
 Why?
What type of property does the court hold the dog to be?
Deprivation of Property





Must the government pay compensation if it takes
this sort of property?
Is this a taking?
How does the government characterize killing the
dogs?
Did the court find the dog had been seized?
Is a seizure the same as a taking?
Court's Factual Analysis



What are the self-defense issues?
Should these matter?
The dissent says that this was a clear
constitutional violation based on violations of
federal law
 Did the majority find a federal dog protection
act?
Add the Adlaw Context



What is the Mathews analysis for this case?
What is justification for the summary action?
How is the dog like the bad chicken in North
American?
Qualified Immunity

We will return to this later in the course when look
hard at 42 USC 1983