A dog is not a couch: California appeals court rules pets are more than mere property
The outdated legal view of dogs as easily-replaceable “property” — worth no more than you paid for them — is slowly beginning to catch up with the times.
The latest indication of a change in judicial thinking came last week when California’s Second District Court of Appeals ruled that pets are fundamentally different than other forms of property.
“Given . . . the reality that animals are living creatures, the usual standard of recovery for damaged personal property — market value — is inadequate when applied to injured pets,” Justice Kathryn Doi Todd wrote in her opinion.
She added, “Animals are special, sentient beings, (and) unlike other forms of property, animals feel pain, suffer and die.”
The Court of Appeals ruling came in the consolidated cases of two pet owners — one whose dog was shot by a neighbor, and one whose dog was injured by veterinary negligence. Lower courts had ruled they were entitled to no more than the market value of their pets.
The appeals court decision reversed both cases. The new ruling permits owners of wrongfully injured pets to recover the “reasonable and necessary costs” of treating and caring for an injured animal, according to the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), which had filed amicus briefs in the case.
The first case involved a German Shepherd named Gunner, who was shot by a neighbor and whose leg had to be amputated, costing his family more than $20,000. The second case involved a Golden Retriever named Katie, whose intestine was nicked during a surgical procedure. The vet also left a piece of gauze in her body. The errors led to the dog having to receive emergency surgery that cost Katie’s family more than $37,000.
In both cases, the trial court limited the plaintiffs’ recovery to a fraction of what they spent to nurse them back to health — namely, their dogs’ market value.
“This decision is a significant step forward for companion animals and their guardians,” said Matthew Liebman, ALDF senior attorney. “The legal system is finally starting to catch up with how the majority of people feel about the animals with whom they share their lives.”
Posted by jwoestendiek October 29th, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: aldf, animal, animal legal defense fund, appeals, court, courts, dog, dogs, german shepherd, golden retriever, gunner, injuries, judicial, kathryn doi todd, katie, law, lawsuits, legal, market value, pets, property, ruling, value, view, wrongful
Comments
Comment from doug williams
Time October 31, 2012 at 12:06 am
What a horrible idea.. ADLF is an a animal rights group that will not stop until all “sentient beings” are represented in court .. by guess who ALDF.. lawyers drumming up $$$.. not enough ambulances to chase .. guess when you are sued for killing mosquitoes by spraying them until they are dead.. or eating a cow.. you might come to your senses.. this is BAD LAW.
Comment from Dr. H. Hail
Time November 1, 2012 at 10:51 am
If you think your vet bills are high just wait until the lawyers start suing your vet on behalf of your pet. This is ill considered and stupid. This judge needs to be dethroned as he has allowed lawyers now access to sue you over your own property. Cruelty laws are enough we don’t need money settlement and greedy lawyers causing vet costs to rise more.
Comment from Dr. H. Hail
Time November 1, 2012 at 10:54 am
Only animal rights cult members feel this way. the majority of the public is unaware of the true nature of this sound good but awful law. Just know that if your neighbor has a pet he can now sue you for anything he thinks you may have done to his dog. There will be no more accidents everything will now be considered under the light of big money awards for supposed injuries.
Comment from Kelly Sawyer – Republicans Against Cruelty
Time November 28, 2012 at 2:50 pm
For all those who have commented above– let this be a WARNING FOR YOU ANIMAL ABUSING AGENDA ….Don’t harm the animals and you have zero to worry about… Hypothetical perception of damage does not win in a court of law this is for proven damages… My father was a Neurosurgeon and Malpractice Insurance is a fact of Life for Doctors- If you are a Veterinarian Concerned about this, Perhaps you should reconsider professions as ethical and capable physicians that don’t abuse Unnecessary surgeries or DO NOT cause REAL HARM UNDER ETHICAL AND CAPABLE MEDICAL TREATMENT HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!!! — NOT ANIMAL RIGHTS– IT IS ACCOUNTABILITY OF ANIMAL ABUSE!! — GO ETHICAL AND HUMANE OR GOT OUT OF BUSINESS DR.!!
Comment from Lelane
Time October 29, 2012 at 9:28 am
At last we seem to be making strides in the right direction.
Thank goodness.