• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Service dog area of control

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

scuba dad

Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio
I have a service dog that spends her outside time in a fenced in yard. My neighbors are all aware of her and are great with her. My concern is kids or others entering or releasing her form her control area. I do not want to put up do not trespass signs as they are tacky and I do not want my neighbors to have to look at them. the ORC 2921.321 has very specific wording on what type of action taken and what the penalty for said action is. I am going to have a local sign company print all relevant information on sign(s). Is simply stating the ORC enough, or should I spell out what the law says and if so what parts?
I was thinking of a sign that said "notice: this is a working service dog area of control. It is a violation of ORC 2921.321 to Release the dog from its area of control; enter the area of control of the dog without the consent of the served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area."
Or would a simple "Notice: this is a working service dog area of control and is protected by ORC 2921.321"
Do I have to spell out the law or simply state the code number?
Section (C) - (2) states that "the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog."

to clarify (4) " Assistance dog," "blind," and "mobility impaired person" have the same meanings as in section 955.011 of the Revised Code.

Thank you

The charges can be very serious, in fact they are the exact same as a police dog, from what I read.
 


Silverplum

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio
I have a service dog that spends her outside time in a fenced in yard. My neighbors are all aware of her and are great with her. My concern is kids or others entering or releasing her form her control area. I do not want to put up do not trespass signs as they are tacky and I do not want my neighbors to have to look at them. the ORC 2921.321 has very specific wording on what type of action taken and what the penalty for said action is. I am going to have a local sign company print all relevant information on sign(s). Is simply stating the ORC enough, or should I spell out what the law says and if so what parts?
I was thinking of a sign that said "notice: this is a working service dog area of control. It is a violation of ORC 2921.321 to Release the dog from its area of control; enter the area of control of the dog without the consent of the served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area."
Or would a simple "Notice: this is a working service dog area of control and is protected by ORC 2921.321"
Do I have to spell out the law or simply state the code number?
Section (C) - (2) states that "the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog."

to clarify (4) " Assistance dog," "blind," and "mobility impaired person" have the same meanings as in section 955.011 of the Revised Code.

Thank you

The charges can be very serious, in fact they are the exact same as a police dog, from what I read.
All that aside, why not lock the gate?
 

Antigone*

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio
I have a service dog that spends her outside time in a fenced in yard. My neighbors are all aware of her and are great with her. My concern is kids or others entering or releasing her form her control area. I do not want to put up do not trespass signs as they are tacky and I do not want my neighbors to have to look at them. the ORC 2921.321 has very specific wording on what type of action taken and what the penalty for said action is. I am going to have a local sign company print all relevant information on sign(s). Is simply stating the ORC enough, or should I spell out what the law says and if so what parts?
I was thinking of a sign that said "notice: this is a working service dog area of control. It is a violation of ORC 2921.321 to Release the dog from its area of control; enter the area of control of the dog without the consent of the served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area."
Or would a simple "Notice: this is a working service dog area of control and is protected by ORC 2921.321"
Do I have to spell out the law or simply state the code number?
Section (C) - (2) states that "the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog."

to clarify (4) " Assistance dog," "blind," and "mobility impaired person" have the same meanings as in section 955.011 of the Revised Code.

Thank you

The charges can be very serious, in fact they are the exact same as a police dog, from what I read.

A sign isn't going to accomplish much if a person wants to open your fence. Why don't you lock the fence?
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Section (C) - (2) states that "the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog."
the only thing the knowledge issue applies to is the actions described by C(2)



(C) No person shall knowingly cause, or attempt to cause, physical harm to an assistance dog in either of the following circumstances:

(1) The dog is assisting or serving a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time the physical harm is caused or attempted.

(2) The dog is not assisting or serving a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time the physical harm is caused or attempted, but the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog.

there is no need to list the law of any specifics of the law. All that matters is whether the offender is aware it is an assistance animal. That could be addressed with a simple sign:

this is an assistance animal


If you want to list the entire law, you can but it is not required the offender be aware of anything more than it is an assistance animal.

Everything else I see seems to speak to reckless actions (as opposed to other levels of actions such as negligence) and the knowledge it is a service animal does not seem to be required.

I think you misunderstood the part concerning the control area.



(3) Interfere with or obstruct an assistance dog, or interfere with or obstruct a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person who is being assisted or served by an assistance dog, in a manner that does any of the following:

(a) Inhibits or restricts the assisted or served person's control of the dog;

(b) Deprives the assisted or served person of control of the dog;

(c) Releases the dog from its area of control;

(d) Enters the area of control of the dog without the consent of the assisted or served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area;

(e) Inhibits or restricts the ability of the dog to assist the assisted or served person.


Due to the phrasing of that section of the law, I would suggest the are of control is the immediate area around you; as in, within it's normal operating range in relation to where you are. Again, I do not read it as applying to your yard in general.
 
Last edited:

scuba dad

Member
The gates are locked.

C: area of control, must refer to a fenced area or they would not specify that - (d) Enters the area of control of the dog without the consent of the assisted or served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area. if C equals the 6 foot area around me then D would have to mean that every member of the public would have to ask for my permission to enter that 6 foot radius.

But C 2 says "The dog is NOT ASSISTING OR SERVING a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time"

I will ask the local K-9 officer tomorrow.

The sign makes it a crime (3) Whoever violates division (C) of this section is guilty of assaulting an assistance dog. Except as otherwise provided in this division, assaulting an assistance dog is a misdemeanor of the second degree. If the violation results in the death of the assistance dog, assaulting an assistance dog is a felony of the third degree. If the violation results in serious physical harm to the assistance dog other than its death, assaulting an assistance dog is a felony of the fourth degree. If the violation results in physical harm to the assistance dog other than death or serious physical harm, assaulting an assistance dog is a misdemeanor of the first degree.
 
Last edited:

scuba dad

Member
aditional penilties

(5) In addition to any other sanction or penalty imposed for the offense under this section, Chapter 2929., or any other provision of the Revised Code, whoever violates division (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this section is responsible for the payment of all of the following:

(a) Any veterinary bill or bill for medication incurred as a result of the violation by the police department regarding a violation of division (A) or (B) of this section or by the blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person assisted or served by the assistance dog regarding a violation of division (C) or (D) of this section;

(b) The cost of any damaged equipment that results from the violation;

(c) If the violation did not result in the death of the police dog or horse or the assistance dog that was the subject of the violation and if, as a result of that dog or horse being the subject of the violation, the dog or horse needs further training or retraining to be able to continue in the capacity of a police dog or horse or an assistance dog, the cost of any further training or retraining of that dog or horse by a law enforcement officer or by the blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person assisted or served by the assistance dog;

(d) If the violation resulted in the death of the police dog or horse or the assistance dog that was the subject of the violation or resulted in serious physical harm to that dog or horse to the extent that the dog or horse needs to be replaced on either a temporary or a permanent basis, the cost of replacing that dog or horse and of any further training of a new police dog or horse or a new assistance dog by a law enforcement officer or by the blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person assisted or served by the assistance dog, which replacement or training is required because of the death of or the serious physical harm to the dog or horse that was the subject of the violation.

(F) This section does not apply to a licensed veterinarian whose conduct is in accordance with Chapter 4741. of the Revised Code.

(G) This section only applies to an offender who knows or should know at the time of the violation that the police dog or horse or assistance dog that is the subject of a violation under this section is a police dog or horse or an assistance dog.

Replacement cost of a trained service dog for my conditions is $25,000 to $35,000.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
scuba dad;3173981]The gates are locked.

C: area of control, must refer to a fenced area or they would not specify that - (d) Enters the area of control of the dog without the consent of the assisted or served person, including placing food or any other object or substance into that area. if C equals the 6 foot area around me then D would have to mean that every member of the public would have to ask for my permission to enter that 6 foot radius.
why must it? Is there some reason the area around a person using a service animal should not be protected?

You also missed that the statute says recklessly, not negligently. You should look up the definitions

(3) Interfere with or obstruct an assistance dog, or interfere with or obstruct a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person who is being assisted or served by an assistance dog, in a manner that does any of the following:
but let's say it does apply to your yard. So? The only difference it makes is that to charge C(2), the offender must be aware of the animal being a service dog. Other than that, I see no requirement there be a sign for anything. They crimes are crimes regardless.









The sign makes it a crime (3) Whoever violates division (C) of this section is guilty of assaulting an assistance dog. Except as otherwise provided in this division, assaulting an assistance dog is a misdemeanor of the second degree. If the violation results in the death of the assistance dog, assaulting an assistance dog is a felony of the third degree. If the violation results in serious physical harm to the assistance dog other than its death, assaulting an assistance dog is a felony of the fourth degree. If the violation results in physical harm to the assistance dog other than death or serious physical harm, assaulting an assistance dog is a misdemeanor of the first degree
.where does it state a sign must be posted? Where does it state the offender even have to be aware the dog is an assistance animal?.

But C 2 says "The dog is NOT ASSISTING OR SERVING a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time"
(C) No person shall knowingly cause, or attempt to cause, physical harm to an assistance dog in either of the following circumstances:

(1) The dog is assisting or serving a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time the physical harm is caused or attempted.

(2) The dog is not assisting or serving a blind, deaf or hearing impaired, or mobility impaired person at the time the physical harm is caused or attempted, but the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog.
Yes, in c1 it is when the dog is assisting. C2 is when the dog not assisting but it only applies to


(this is where the big capital C comes in)- KNOWINGLY CAUSE OR ATTEMPT TO CAUSE PHYSICAL HARM

so,that only applies when the person is knowingly causing or attempting to cause harm to the dog. The clarification under C2 does not apply to any other situation. Where was my statement incorrect? The other violations are violations regardless of whether the person is aware it is an assistance animal or not.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
(G) This section only applies to an offender who knows or should know at the time of the violation that the police dog or horse or assistance dog that is the subject of a violation under this section is a police dog or horse or an assistance dog.

Ok, I'll give you that so we are back to a sign that says:


this is an assistance dog


other than that, you do not have to post any information regarding the law unless you choose to.
 

scuba dad

Member
No if you let the neighbors dog out of their fenced in area and the dog is hit by a car and dies you are not looking at a class 3 felony. and up to 40k out of pocket. unless you can link to such a law.
And I have shown you more than once that " but the offender has actual knowledge that the dog is an assistance dog" That requires a sign! That is the ENTIRE reason for the thread! GOOD NIGHT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top