Results

Displaying 11 - 20 of 52
Title Authorsort descending Citation Summary
The Future of Veterinary Malpractice Liability in the Care of Companion Animals Christopher Green 10 Animal L. 163 (2004)

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.

Valuing Man's and Woman's Best Friend: The Moral and Legal Status of Companion Animals Rebecca J. Huss 86 Marq. L. Rev. 47 (2002)

This Article first provides an overview of the philosophical basis of the allocation (or non-allocation) of moral status to nonhuman animals considering historical and modern views of animals. Second, it analyzes the legal status of animals under the current system and discusses the idea of extending legal 'personhood' to such animals. Next, it considers the common law and statutory basis for the current valuation of companion animals. Finally, this Article supports and promotes the idea that there is a rational basis for changing the way that companion animals should be valued by the legal system and recommends the adoption of statutory provisions to promote consistency and certainty in these cases.

No Shelter from the Storm: How the Execution of Pets by Law Enforcement at Beauregard Middle School in St. Bernard Parish in the Aftermath of Katrina Violated the Constitutional Rights of Pet Owners Kelly A. Jenkins Animal Legal & Historical Center

This paper explores the Fourth Amendment rights of a dog owner when law enforcement executes his/her canine companion. This paper is framed around the experiences of St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana residents who evacuated to Beauregard Middle School during Hurricane Katrina.

Damages for the Injuring or Killing of an Animal in Swiss Law Eveline Schmeider Kayasseh Animal Legal & Historical Center

A discussion of the state of the Swiss law on the issue of damages for companion animals after the changes of the 2003 legislation (in English).
Law Review - Non Economic Pet Damages - Torts Victor E. Schwartz and Emily J. Laird 33 PEPP. L. REV. 227-273 (2006) For more than two hundred years, the traditional rule in pet law has been to limit damages to the market value of the animal that has been injured or killed.This system has worked well, resulting in low and predictable costs of veterinary services. Yet, some have regarded the system as overly harsh because of the very strong emotions pet owners may feel when a pet is injured or dies because of another’s negligence. As a result, advocates of change to the traditional damage rules in animal cases encourage courts and legislatures to award non-economic damages in pet cases. This article will describe these potential changes and the public policy implications of changing the rules of damages in animal law.
THE ANIMAL COMPANION PUZZLE: A WORTH UNKNOWN THOUGH HEIGHT TAKEN Ronald B. Lansing 18 Animal L. 105 (2011)

Folks come to law smithies with tort troubles. Those troubles follow this general scenario: Allegedly, someone has breached a duty owed that damaged another’s right, thus calling for a duty of smithies to fix it. In this nation’s separation of government powers, that scenario initiates a job for the judicial branch, where courts are the shop smithies. Within their job description and among its many work orders lies the issue of pet loss remedy. That remedy will be the focus of this Essay; but first, all remedy of any kind must be put in context.
CAN NONHUMAN ANIMALS FIND TORT PROTECTION IN A HUMAN-CENTERED COMMON LAW? Enger McCartney-Smith 4 Animal L. 173 (1998) The question of 'Rights allocation" typically hinges on society's distinction between legal and moral entitlement. Although many rights find support in both categories, not all rights grounded in societal morality are likewise accorded legal status. The animal rights movement, particularly in the last three decades, has advanced the recognition of nonhuman animals' moral entitlements, but corresponding legal rights have been slow to follow. This Comment explores this gap in nonhuman animals' rights allocation with an eye toward establishing a basis for a private right of intentional tort action. Through appeal to predominant tort jurisprudential theories, in conjunction with an examination of our scientifically and experientially grounded understanding of nonhuman animals, the Comment concludes that there is room in our current legal system for direct recognition of, and compensation for, intentional injurious behavior aimed at nonhuman animals
Is the Law of Acquisition of Property by Find Going to the Dogs? Eric W. Neilsen 15 T.M. Cooley L. Rev. 479 (1998)

This Comment attempts to resolve the considerable confusion in the law of acquisition by find of property as it relates to companion animals. First, the development of the theories of the common law and legislative solutions to lost and estray property will be examined to provide a legal foundation for analysis of lost property and animals. Then, the focus will turn to the public policy arguments that courts across the country are relying on in their decisions as new common law is made in judicial resolutions of the competing issues. Finally, the Author provides a reasonable solution in light of legislative and judicial action.

Fido Seeks Full Membership in the Family: Dismantling the Property Classification of Companion Animals by Statute Elizabeth Paek 25 U. Hawai’i L. Rev. 481 (2003)

This paper proposes that various state legislatures should progressively dismantle the property classification of companion animals by enacting statutes permitting animal guardians recovery for non-economic damages in torts, and requiring courts to apply the "best interests of the pet" standard in custody and visitation disputes. Section II of this paper sets forth the conflict between the social and legal views of companion animals, and the historical evidence supporting each. Section III analyzes court opinions that treat companion animals as property and illustrates how the conflicting views of companion animals are manifested in case law. Section IV identifies the current trend in court decisions and legislative actions suggesting that both judges and legislators acknowledge companion animals as more than property.

Every Dog Can Have Its Day: Extending Liability Beyond the Seller by Defining Pets as “Products” Under Products LIiability Theory Jason Parent 12 Animal L. 241 (2005)

Is a pet a “product”? A pet is a product for purposes of products liability law in some states, and as this article will show, the remaining states should follow suit. Every year, thousands of “domesticated” animals are sold to consumers who are uninformed as to the animal’s propensities or to the proper method of animal care. In some instances, these animals are unreasonably dangerous in that they spread disease to humans or attack, and possibly kill, unwitting victims. Improper breeding and training techniques and negligence in sales have led to horrific injury. This comment will demonstrate how merely considering pets as products opens up new theories of liability for the plaintiff’s lawyer, offering a deeper base of defendants who are both morally and legally at fault. From the standpoint of a consumer advocate and with concern for both human and animal welfare, the author proposes employing products liability theory to the sale of domesticated animals. By making sellers of “defective” animals accountable for personal injury that these animals cause, the quality of the animals bred and sold will likely improve. Where it does not improve and injury results, the victim may have recourse beyond the confines of contract remedies. Products liability theory is a lawful and needed method for preventing future harm and providing for a healthier human and animal kingdom.

Pages