We have posted about this problem before: that, in the eyes of the law, dogs are often seen as nothing more than property. Well, a three-member panel of the Oregon Appeals Court codified that legal definition on Wednesday, throwing out the conviction of a woman who starved and abused her dog. The reason for the reversal? Because a vet’s testing of the dog, without a warrant, constituted unlawful search of property. Keep in mind that the vet was concerned with the health of the dog before him and did what he considered necessary to nurse it back to health. You really need a warrant for that?