Veterinarian Issues: Related Articles

Author Article Namesort descending Summary
Katie J.L. Scott Bailment and Veterinary Malpractice: Doctrinal Exclusivity, of Not?

This Note argues that treating bailment and veterinary malpractice as mutually exclusive is neither necessary nor desirable. In doing so, it first gives an overview of animals' status as property, the doctrine of bailment, and veterinary malpractice. Second, the seminal case discrediting bailment in favor of veterinary malpractice, Price v. Brown, [FN6] is discussed. Finally, this Note explores the reasons why bailment and veterinary malpractice should not be treated as mutually exclusive, and why pet owners should be able to recover for negligence by a veterinarian under the doctrine of bailment.

Akisha R. N. McGee Brief Overview of Veterinary Client Issues

This is a brief view of the boundaries of a person's relationship with his or her veterinarian.

Rebecca F. Wisch Brief Summary of Veterinary Malpractice

This article provides an overview of the elements of a veterinary malpractice case, possible defenses to such an action, and issues related to professional licensing of veterinarians.

Akisha R. N. McGee Detailed Discussion of Veterinarian Client Issues

This gives a detailed view of the boundaries of veterinarian-client relationships, as well as the regulations and administrative policies that make up those boundaries.

David S. Favre Detailed Discussion of Veterinarian Malpractice

This article provides a short history of the development of veterinary malpractice as a cause of action and also explores the elements of a malpractice suit. It further delineates the concepts of standard of care, proximate cause, and res ipsa loquitur. Defenses to malpractice actions are also discussed.

Rebecca F. Wisch FAQ: Veterinary Malpractice

This article provides a short reader-based FAQ on veterinary malpractice.

Phyllis Coleman Man['s Best Friend] Does Not Live By Bread Alone: Imposing a Duty to Provide Veterinary Care

Although all states outlaw cruelty to companion animals, most jurisdictions only prohibit causing unnecessary suffering as well as failure to provide food, water, and shelter. They do not address whether owners must obtain veterinary care. Even the few statutes that mention such treatment do not define exactly what kind and how much is required. This article highlights the deficiencies in these laws. It argues that keeping pets creates an obligation to get them medical treatment when they are sick or injured and also explains why such a duty is necessary. In addition, it proposes uniform legislation that creates an explicit obligation to provide health care to companion animals, imposes a duty on veterinarians to report cruelty, and establishes strict penalties for violations.

Mary Margaret McEachern Nunalee & G. Robert Weedon Modern Trends in Veterinary Malpractice: How Our Evolving Attitudes Toward Nonhuman Animals Will Change Veterinary Medicine

The purpose of this article is to trace the historical trends in the attitudes of humans toward non-human animals generally and apply that analysis to recent and predicted future trends in veterinary malpractice jurisprudence. This article is also designed to assist attorneys representing owners and veterinarians in spotting the myriad legal issues that have arisen from these trends in order to more effectively represent parties to malpractice actions.

Kim Eileen Bell Nelson v. State Board of Veterinary Medicine: The Commonwealth Court Carves A Sharper Definition of Veterinary Malpractice

This survey provides a foundation of some basic animal law doctrine, as well as the current state of the law of veterinary malpractice in the United States and, more narrowly, in Pennsylvania. It then examines the Nelson case and how the Commonwealth Court came to its conclusion that rude behavior toward a human client does not constitute malpractice of the animal patient. This survey then renders an evaluation and critique of the Commonwealth Court's decision from the viewpoint of administrative law.

Steve Barghusen NONECONOMIC DAMAGE AWARDS IN VETERINARY MALPRACTICE: USING THE HUMAN MEDICAL EXPERIENCE AS A MODEL TO PREDICT THE EFFECT OF NONECONOMIC DAMAGE AWARDS ON THE PRACTICE OF COMPANION ANIMAL VETERINARY MEDICINE

Many scholars have argued for and against the recovery of noneconomic damages in cases of veterinary malpractice involving companion animals. However, scholarship has not focused on the results that allowing noneconomic damages may have on the structure of companion animal veterinary practices. This Article uses the human medical field as a predictive model to explore the potential effects of granting noneconomic damages in veterinary malpractice cases. The author argues that awarding damages substantial enough to encourage increased litigation will result in significant changes in the field of veterinary medicine. Allowing for recovery of noneconomic damages will make veterinary care more expensive and will not significantly deter negligent malpractice. Individuals will pay more for veterinary care or companion animals will receive less care if high noneconomic damage awards become the norm in veterinary malpractice cases. Although these changes will affect all veterinary facilities, ironically, high quality veterinary facilities may be more likely to be sued than their lower quality counterparts. The author concludes by discussing alternatives to malpractice litigation, the human-animal bond, and the possible factors contributing to the high cost of human medicine in the United States.

Alexandra Kleinfeldt Overview of Animal Euthanasia This article offers an overview of euthanasia of animals. It offers explanations behind the reasons for animal euthanasia, discusses different euthanasia methods that are permitted, and list persons who may perform euthanasia. The article also refers ethical and moral dilemmas associated with animal euthanasia requests as well as to state laws dealing with animal euthanasia.
Akisha R. N. McGee Overview of Veterinary Client Issues

This gives a somewhat detailed view of the relationship between a veterinarian and client.

Animal Rescue League Reporting Animal Cruelty The Reporting Animal Cruelty: The Role of the Veterinarian manual for Massachusetts is possible due to the collaborative efforts of Animal Folks, the Animal Rescue League of Boston, and the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University, with funding by these organizations and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). The purpose of this manual is to provide explanations of law and supporting materials so, as a veterinarian, you can develop protocols for your clinic or practice which can guide your actions should you or others face a suspected or known case of animal neglect, cruelty, or abuse. In addition to establishing protocols, information within the manual can also be used by veterinarians when assisting law enforcement in the investigation of animal cruelty cases. This manual is slanted more to smaller companion animals, though many of the principles and procedures described are applicable to horses, farmed animals, exotic animals, and wildlife.
Christopher Green The Future of Veterinary Malpractice Liability in the Care of Companion Animals

This comment investigates the factual bases of arguments from the veterinary community and of those that support increasing the malpractice liability of veterinarians. Combining law and economics theory with basic mathematics to evaluate the validity of these positions, it then suggests specific measures for legislatively addressing those parties' concerns.

Favre David S. Veterinary Malpractice: Questions for the Owner

This article provides several key questions a pet owner must ask him or herself prior to initiating a veterinary malpractice lawsuit.

Gerald L. Eichinger Veterinary Medicine: External Pressures on an Insular Profession and How Those Pressures Threaten to Change Current Malpractice Jurisdiction

This article discusses the recent attention focused on veterinary malpractice claims. The author suggests that changes in both state legislation allowing recovery of non-economic damages for companion animals as well as isolated litigation awards beyond market value for veterinary malpractice make it imperative for the veterinary profession to take a stance on the issue.