Question:

In August I had two senior cats that were being treated by the same vet for three years. One had to be put to sleep then. After changing to another vet in the SAME facility, we discovered too late (for one) that tests and treatment that should have been given to BOTH cats were not according to their records (including the vet not knowing about mirtazipine to treat the anorexia that contributed to the first cat's death) for the entire three years. The other cat, which showed symptoms as early as a year or more earlier, was then discovered (the same month) by the other vet to have cancer. An oncologist all but said, the second cat, now totally in remission, would have been gone by November under the same care it had been getting (or NOT getting) prior to switching vets. There were NO X-rays or ultrasounds, among other things, ever done on my senior animals even though I was being told that from the time I brought them to him at 11 and 13 years old, they were being tested and treated very carefully for everything. I made it clear from the beginning that money was not an issue (I have spent nearly $15,000 since August) and would have spent double to save the other cat from the suffering I believe she went through, besides her premature death from lack of proper treatment. Of course there is much more to this, but based on what you are hearing so far, does it sound like there might be legal recourse here? Do the courts take issues with animals seriously enough? Thank you. It's greatly appreciated.

Answer:

To file a complaint against a veterinarian in Nevada, go to the Nevada State Board of Veterinary Examiners website at www.nvvetboard.us (where you can download a complaint form) or call their office at 775-688-1788. The board has the power to reprimand and fine veterinarians and to suspend and revoke licenses. They do not get involved in financial disputes between veterinarians and clients. You can sue the veterinarian but you will need expert testimony to prove your allegations that the veterinarian acted negligently in caring for your cat. While many courts do not award significant amount of money in cases involving harm or death to animals, in recent years some courts have taken these cases more seriously and have awarded more damages than in the past. In a California veterinary malpractice case, for example, the jury awarded more than $30,000 to a person whose dog died after being misdiagnosed and given incorrect treatment.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

Approximately 10 weeks ago my daughter purchased a Yorkie from a private breeder/AKC registered in Missouri. In the health contract it says refund purchase price or replace puppy if a major health problem such as heart, kidney, liver. My question is about the breeders responsibility to assist in paying medical expenses that were incurred over the past 10 weeks after numerous ER and specialist visits they kept telling us that the Yorkie was experiencing blood sugar problems. At one point they had him tested for liver shunt problems and my daughter then contacted the breeder but the lab results came back negative - so we thought no recourse was needed with the breeder. Long story short, the Yorkie pup had a seizure this past Monday and died. I have documented all the movement and care instructions given by the vets to show the breeder that we really didn't know that the puppy died from possible epilepsy and liver shunt issues until the morning we lost him. Since the epilepsy is connected to vital organ...the brain, we feel if she was a reputable breeder she would step to the plate and do right by her pup. The breeder refuses to accept any of the costs, we only asked for 50% and the cost of the puppy, saying that she should have been notified prior to treatment. The earlier treatments my daughter thought were blood sugar issues which would have not been covered under the health contract so she proceeded to take the best care of her pup as she knew how. I would like to see if we have any way to press the issue legally with this breeder in the state of Missouri. The one thing we don't want to see is her breeding and selling sick puppies to other innocent loving people who will have their hearts crushed if the animals die.

Answer:

I am so sorry to hear about the death of your daughter's dog. Your daughter can consider suing the breeder on the grounds that the breeder violated an implied warranty of merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code. When merchants sell animals, the animals are supposed to be fit for sale. However, your daughter will need evidence that the dog was not fit for sale at the time she purchased the dog. You can also contact the USDA which is responsible for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act (which covers many breeders). The regional office of the USDA's Animal Plant Health Inspection Service which covers Missouri can be contacted at (919) 855-7100, E-mail: aceast@aphis.usda.gov. I am not sure if your state's attorney generals office will get involved in this kind of matter, but it may be worth a call as well.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

We were camping and our dog was chained to our camper. Another dog on a leash without an owner came onto our site and the dogs started to fight a little. My dog chased the other dog away and in the process got injured by her own chain. Is there any liability of the other owner because the dog got away from them? My dog did nothing wrong but was injured because of the other dog. The wound was treated within 1/2 hr. by an emergency vet center because we thought the wound needed stitches. Now the dog has a dime to nickel sized whole in her right hind leg that we have to treat three times a day for infection. What are my rights?

Answer:

Generally in NY a person is not liable for injuries caused by his/her dog to another dog (other than a service, guide or hearing dog where civil penalties can be assessed) unless the owner knew about his/her dog’s dangerous propensities. Nevertheless, there is an occasional decision where New York courts have considered whether the dog owner’s negligence resulted in his/her dog causing injuries. Also, local laws may provide greater rights (although doubtful in this instance) so you should check with the town attorney’s office or town clerk where this incident occurred. If you cannot resolve this matter amicably with the owner of the other dog, you could commence an action in small claims court (where you can sue for up to $5000). If your damages are in excess of that amount and you want to sue, I suggest you hire an attorney to represent you. For the reasons stated above and because it could be argued that it was your use of the chain that resulted in your dog's injuries, I doubt a court would award you very much (but you never know).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Items 16 - 18 of 187  Previous12345678910Next
Please note that responses to legal inquiries are not meant to replace seeking legal advice from an attorney in your state. The materials in this website and any responses to questions are for informational purposes only and are not intended, nor should they be construed, as legal advice. This website, the information contained herein, and any responses to questions directed to this column are not intended to create and does not establish an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely or act upon any information provided on this website or in any response to your inquiry without seeking the advice of an attorney in your state regarding the facts of your specific situation.

Please note that due to the volume of questions we receive, we cannot guarantee you’ll receive a response.


  Keep in touch! Sign up for free e-newsletter. | Print