Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Companion Animals: An Examination of Their Legal Classification in Italy and the Impact on their Welfare | Annamaria Passantino | 4 Journal of Animal Law 59 (2008) |
Italy's State-Regions Agreement on Companion Animal Welfare and Pet Therapy introduced important new measures aimed at reducing the numbers of stray animals, such as the use of microchips for an official dog identification system and the creation of a computerised data bank. The Author, after having analyzed the legal status of animals under the current system and discussed the idea of extending legal personhood to such animals, considers the law for the current valuation of companion animals. Finally, the Author promotes the idea that there is a legal/rational basis for changing the way that companion animals should be valued by the legal system (such as Agreement) and recommends the adoption of principles/guidelines for the care of pet evaluate these aspects of the Agreement. |
| "Man's Best Friend:" Property or Family Member? An Examination of the Legal Classification of Companion Animals and its Impact | William C. Root | 47 Vill. L. Rev. 423 (2002) |
This article examines the historical treatment of companion animals (pets) under the law as property or chattel, despite the degree of importance most Americans place upon their relationship with their pets. In cases of willful or negligent injury or death to these animals, courts have typically awarded market value damages, which, in most cases are nominal. The author proposes that the characterization of animals as mere property should change to reflect societal views, and punitive damages should be assessed by court where injury to the animal is willful, wanton or reckless. |
| A Factual Account of Immi's Shooting | Pamela L. Roudebush | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
The following excerpt from an appellate court opinion contains the actual facts that occurred when a 3-year old Rotweiller named Immi was unreasonably shot to death by a police officer. |
| Determining the Value of Companion Animals in Wrongful Harm or Death Claims: A Survey of U.S. Decisions and an Argument | Marcella S. Roukas | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
The law in United States categorizes animals as personal property. As a result, recovery of damages for the loss of a companion animal is oftentimes the fair market value. This inflexible approach to companion animals fails to distinguish between personal property such as a chair and a beloved pet. Some state court decisions have authorized human guardians of companion animals to plead and recover the “unique value” of the companion animal. Such decisions reflect a shift in the court’s view of companion animals, which acknowledges public policy concerns for the guardian of the companion animal. This article discusses the law in United States concerning recovery of damages in cases involving harm to companion animals and the reasoning behind why courts should acknowledge such a recovery. |
| Determining the Value of Companion Animals in Wrongful Harm or Wrongful Death Claims: A Survey of U.S. Decisions and Legislative | Marcella Roukas | 3 J. Animal L. 45 (2007) |
The law in United States categorizes animals as personal property. As a result, recovery of damages for the loss of a companion animal is often times the fair market value. This inflexible approach to companion animals fails to distinguish between personal property such as a chair and a beloved pet. Needless to say, awarding damages at fair market value serves as little or no deterrence for the tortfeasor. This is especially true in cases where the companion animal lacks pedigree or special training. However, some decisions have authorized human guardians of companion animals to plead and recover the “unique value” of the companion animal. Such decisions reflect a shift in the court’s view of companion animals, which acknowledges public policy concerns for the guardian of the companion animal. This article discusses the law in United States on companion animals and proposes legislative action in the state of Florida for the recovery of the “loss of companionship” for owners of companion animals. |
| Survey of Damages Measures Recognized in Negligence Cases Involving Animals | Alison M. Rowe | Kentucky Journal of Equine, Agriculture, & Natural Resources Law: Vol. 5 : Iss. 2 , Article 5. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kjeanrl/vol5/iss2/5 | This article will first articulate the various ways in which courts and legislatures have resolved negligence cases involving plaintiffs seeking emotion-based damages for harm done to their companion animals. Second, this article will provide an overview of the public policy issues surrounding recovery for emotional damages in tort cases involving animals. Finally, this article will explain how allowing non-economic damages in companion animal cases involving mere negligence would be unsound public policy and an unwise departure from established law. |
| Can the Injured Pet Owner Look to Liability Insurance for Satisfaction of a Judgment? The Coverage Implications of Damages for the Injury or Death of a Companion Animal | Mark Sadler | 11 Animal L. 283 (2005) | Much has been written in recent years regarding the important role pets play in our society and the legal consequences that have developed from that relationship. Both our courts and legislatures have recognized, in certain circumstances, the ability of a pet owner to recover from a wrongdoer in the event of negligent or intentional conduct that results in the death or injury of a companion animal. However, securing a damages award and recovering on a judgment secured may present the aggrieved pet owner with two entirely different challenges. Liability insurance coverage is critical to the latter concern. Although results can vary considerably by jurisdiction, questions such as the definition of covered damages and the operation of the intentional acts exclusion are likely to play a key role in any analysis. This paper provides a broad overview of some of the larger issues regarding coverage applicability, and illustrates the possible application of these principals by applying them to the facts of cases which have found damages for pet owners where their animals have been injured or killed as a result of negligent, reckless or intentional conduct. |
| Non-Economic Damages in Pet Litigation: The Serious Need to Preserve a Rational Rule | Victor E. Schwartz and Emily J. Laird | 33 PEPP. L. REV. 227-273 (2006) |
This article argues that allowing non-economic damages in pet cases is unsound public policy and contravenes traditional tort rules of damages. Further, the authors suggest that legislative attempts to cap non-economic damages in pet cases are not a helpful compromise. Allowing non-economic damages ignores established common law principles in tort law and will potentially harm animals by raising the cost of veterinary care. |
| Death to Poochy: A Comparison of Historical and Modern Frustrations Faced by Owners of Injured or Killed Pet Dogs | Jason R. Scott | 75 UMKC L. Rev. 569 (Winter, 2006) |
This article explores the various methods courts have used to determine value when assessing damages in pet injury or death cases. In doing so, it focuses on the conflicts that exist between opinions of older courts and more modern courts in determining damages, and how these conflicts have highlighted the transition of a dog's role in society. Finally, the article discusses solutions to these problems, including exploring exemplary statutes in Illinois and Kentucky, along with other solutions that would significantly reduce the stress faced by pet owners and courts when placed in these positions. |
| "Live Animals": Towards Protection for Pets and Livestock in Contracts for Carriage | Erin Sheley | 3 J. Animal L. 59 (2007) |
This article maps the current legal and logistical circumstances of animals in transportation, with a focus on commercial airlines and meat industry trucking practices, and proposes novel ways of utilizing the existing common law of contract adjudication to win stronger protections for such animals, even absent the fulfilled dream of statutory reform. In particular, it argues that courts should utilize two well-established doctrines of contractual interpretation--unconscionability and unenforceability as against public policy--to arrive at more humane results for animals. |