Are Pets Property or Family?

**THL** · 18 Dec 06,, 20:10

My thoughts are this:

The dog should not have been wandering around without a leash in an area that has a leash law. Responsible pet owners would not have allowed their dog the chance to be injured while trespassing.

Had this been a child and not a dog, would the guy with the BB gun have shot at a child that wandered onto his property?

I think they are all nuts.

Courts ponder value of man’s best friend
Should pet owners be compensated for emotional distress damages
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:04 p.m. CT Dec 4, 2006
NORTHFIELD, Vt. - When Denis and Sarah Scheele’s dog was fatally shot after wandering onto a man’s property, they sued — and not just for damages. The couple also wanted compensation for their emotional distress and loss of companionship.

Their case is one of a growing number around the country that asks courts to recognize what dog owners already do: that man’s best friend is worth more than its retail price.

“When you lose something like that, the loss is immeasurable,” said Sarah Scheele, 47. “You can’t just go to a pet store and buy another animal. It doesn’t replace the family member that was lost.”

Unable to have children, the Scheeles got two dogs instead. They fed them human food, brushed their teeth and put coats on them when it rained.

The Scheeles say the death of Shadow, a shepherd-chow-spaniel mix they called their “little boy,” entitles them to damages beyond the direct expenses typically awarded in such cases.

Historically, courts have allowed people suing over the death of an animal to collect such expenses as its purchase price and veterinary bills.

“Courts look at market value, and I don’t think that reflects society’s values,” said the couple’s attorney, Heidi Groff.

The Scheeles’ case began in July 2003, when they drove from their home in Annapolis, Md., to Vermont to watch his aunt and uncle renew their wedding vows. They planned to leave the dogs in their truck during the service.

They got to the church early, so they let the dogs loose, a violation of the leash law in Northfield, which is 10 miles south of Montpelier.

The dogs wandered into Lewis Dustin’s yard. Dustin, 74, who had been squirrel hunting that day, had a combination BB and pellet gun at the ready.

According to the Scheeles, Shadow didn’t menace Dustin. But Dustin fired a pellet at Shadow in hopes of scaring him off.

Instead, the shot penetrated the dog’s chest and severed an aorta. Shadow died en route to a veterinarian’s office.

$4,000 restitution
Dustin later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of animal cruelty. He was given a year of probation and ordered to perform 100 hours of community service and pay $4,000 in restitution.

A judge ruled in the Scheeles’ civil suit that there is no provision in Vermont law that would allow them to recover damages for the loss of Shadow’s companionship or for emotional distress.

The couple plan to appeal to the state Supreme Court.

“What we’re trying to do is expand the law to recognize that the companionship between a dog and its owner is such that the owner is entitled to compensation” when that relationship is destroyed, said David Putter, an attorney hired to help with the appeal.

Though the attorneys acknowledge it’s a novel legal theory, noting that people can’t sue for loss of companionship in the deaths of best friends or domestic partners, they want an exception for four-legged friends.

Between property and people
In recent years, trial courts in Florida, New York, Illinois, California, Oregon and Washington have carved out a category for pets that is somewhere between property and people.

An appeals court in Washington state last May created a new tort called “malicious injury to a pet,” which allows someone to collect emotional distress damages. The case involved three teenagers who doused a cat with gasoline and lit it on fire. The cat was euthanized.

Animal law expert Geordie Duckler said appellate courts have lagged society at large in recognizing the relationship between a pet and its owner.

“As soon as some good appellate panel (of judges) recognizes this special relationship that people have had for a long time with their pets, I think it will be like the flip of a light switch,” and the law nationwide will change, said Duckler, a Portland, Ore., lawyer.

For his part, Dustin believes the issue has been overblown.

“These people think that this dog is a human being,” he said. “It’s not a human being. And that dog was trespassing.”

Dustin said he can’t afford a lawyer and would take whatever comes as the litigation continues.

“If they want to put me in jail, that’s what they can do,” he said. “I’m not going to pay them anything because I don’t owe them anything. All I’m going to do is go to court and go through the motions.”

Sarah Scheele said she and her husband are pursing the case to honor Shadow.

“We’re not in it for the money,” she said. “We want to get national legislation that will recognize pets as companions and not just property."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16036280/

**omon** · 18 Dec 06,, 20:20

That would be his last day on earth if he shot my dog.
but imo the dog,s owners are just as responsible for this death as the shooter. they let the dog get in a harms way, they wanted to lock their dogs in the trunk of the car, if it was up to me i wouldn't let them have any dog ever. i ocasionaly take my dog with me when i drive to a store, i lock him in the car, and live all 4 windows crack open. he just sleeps on the back seat. i never let him loose unless he is in the dog run, or home. why couldn't they do this??

**Amled** · 18 Dec 06,, 20:22

To my mind they are property!
My last dog and cat thought differently. Their behaviour made it clear they were not only family, but that I was only there to open cans and to see that they were aired!

**sappersgt** · 18 Dec 06,, 21:49

My dog gets more presents than I do on Christmas and my birthday. Yes the dog get presents addressed to her on MY birthday. I guess she's just easier to buy for.

**Jay** · 18 Dec 06,, 21:52

The dog owners should be sued for negligence.

Just for an example, I'm not sure how I would react if I see a angry looking 100lb dog in my yard, either I run or try to scare the dog away. At 74yrs, I think this guy chose a whole different route.

How ever, killing an animal is wrong, what ever said and done.

**omon** · 18 Dec 06,, 22:09

shoting an angry dog especially a big one might provoke him to attack you even more(accuming you didn't kill him with 1 shot), the best way to deal with big angry dog is(tryed it myself a few times) is to throw a jacket or any blanket over its head, let him bite it and quikly wrap his head in it. somethimes i didn't do it right the first time, for which i got bitten, but fortunatly nothing serious. the only part of the dog that is dagerious is its teeth, once the head is wraped it can't do much harm, if any. In ukraine there are tens of thousands stray dogs on the street, very often people have to deal with them. Very often little food will turn this big angry stray dog into submisive puppy.

**gunnut** · 18 Dec 06,, 22:19

Ooh that's good advice. Throw a jacket over its head...got it. Just in case I can't get to my shotgun or hockey stick.

**Parihaka** · 18 Dec 06,, 22:38

My cat is a squatter. He allows me to feed him and help him out with the longhair cats next door, in return he agrees to not scratch my wee boy and brings me half-eaten dead mice.
As for the dead dog, what would the owners do if the dog was run over by a car, sue the driver?

**Jay** · 19 Dec 06,, 00:11

Originally Posted by omon

shoting an angry dog especially a big one might provoke him to attack you even more(accuming you didn't kill him with 1 shot),

I think, after getting a shot from a regular gun a domesticated dog will not run towards me, however big he is.

**omon** · 19 Dec 06,, 00:55

probably, but not if it's a pitbull raised in the getto, gunshots is a common sound to them, or my dog that falls a sleep at the range(took him there one, tied him to a tree, he slept like nothing, thousands gunshots didn't bother him a bit), but almost certanly nobody would be afraid of Chucky.and also not every time you have a gun handy.

**dalem** · 19 Dec 06,, 02:29

Property. Dear property but property nonetheless.

-dale

**Officer of Engineers** · 19 Dec 06,, 03:12

Property. We have legal rights to shoot unleashed dogs on farmland. They're called coyotes uphere but in reality just feral dogs and the game wardens want them shot or they'll reduce the white tail herd at times just for sport.

**Julie** · 19 Dec 06,, 03:23

The owners are clearly irresponsible and have not been held accountable for their actions.

Whether it be property or family, you have a responsibility to keep it a nuisance from neighbors.

I have two dogs that are spoiled rotten, but their collars don't allow them to go further than their yard boundary. And, God help, another unleashed dog come into their territory.

**jame$thegreat** · 20 Dec 06,, 01:08

Am I the only one that find that shot to be nothing short of a miracle? Come on! What are the chances that of all the places this guy shoots the thing its in its aorta! Im not condoning it but still that was quite a shot.

My opinion? Property. Its completely the owner's fault and the shooter should not be blamed for their neglegence (sp?). He was threatened by a tresspassing dog and instinctually shot, not even to kill or stun but to scare away and merely missed. He was not wrong and it was an accident. Its the owners fault end of stoy.

**Ray** · 20 Dec 06,, 01:34

I have four dogs.

To me, they are family.

That is why, both my wife and I cannot go on a holday together. One of us have to stay at home to look after them.

We don't mind this so called inconvenience.