Texas court asks: Is man's best friend priceless?

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by Reader, Jan 11, 2013.

  1. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.centurylink.net/news/rea...ws_id=19248691&src=most_popular_viewed&page=1

    AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — They say all dogs go to heaven. But if they get there before their time, should someone pay up?

    The Texas Supreme Court began mulling Thursday whether grieving dog owners should be able to sue for the "emotional value" of man's best friend. It comes after a Fort Worth animal shelter mistakenly euthanized a beloved — but essentially worthless, in terms of actual market value — family Labrador retriever named Avery who ran away from home in 2009.

    Lining up in opposition are skittish veterinarians who say letting juries somehow calculate sentimental payouts would set a costly precedent that would ripple nationwide. Justices on Texas' highest civil court appeared skeptical, too, at times of whether dogs should be granted an emotional price tag that humans in many scenarios aren't even afforded under state law.

    More at link.....
     
  2. Loading...


  3. TrackerSam

    TrackerSam New Member

    Messages:
    4,278
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This shouldn't be restricted to dogs. People love their pets and most are members of the family, but 'priceless'.....no.
     
  4. wfgodot

    wfgodot Former Member

    Messages:
    30,162
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not sure why they'd even compare the two. No, pets aren't people. Their intrinsic value must be figured apart from any such ridiculous equation. And yes, a value can be placed on the "priceless."
     
  5. Herding Cats

    Herding Cats New Member

    Messages:
    7,966
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What a difficult question.

    As the "owner" of about a million animals, I am of the firm opinion that they are worth far more than their pricetag. Grace was breeder purchased, and was a grand total of $1300 (including transportation to me). If someone killed her, I'd be beyond imaginable with grief. The love and loyalty and friendship and companionship she provides me is incalculable...as are the rest of my critters.

    If there was an accidental euthanasia, I think that there needs to be some compensation; yes, animals are considered property and as such, defendants are only held liable for replacement costs.

    But should a sentient animal be considered property? Should they be compensated for pain and loss of use when a surgery gets botched? And should the "family" of the animal be entitled to some compensation? Excepting the first question, my answer is YES...and in regards to the first question, I don't consider any of my animals property. They're 'family' to me.

    I think that perhaps capping the amount of money one could win would eliminate a lot of stupid lawsuits...but I do believe that there should be a place in the court system where living, breathing animals are considered more than just property.

    I have a great sofa...but it doesn't love me back the way my babies do. Should the sofa need to be thrown out, it would not cause me any grief to do so. I can't say the same for any one of my critters; even Penguin, who is feral and physically severely handicapped, provides me with love, even though I can't touch her.

    Just my thoughts, and as always, jmo.

    Best-
    Herding Cats
     
  6. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How about I produce the vet bills I've paid to keep my 14-year-old cat alive? That ought to be a hint as to how much he's worth to me.

    (Just to be clear, I would never force a cat to live if his quality of life were irreversibly impaired. My cat is as healthy and active as he's ever been (except for being deaf), but there was a rough patch about 3 years back that took a very expensive year to diagnose and resolve.)
     
  7. Sonya610

    Sonya610 Former Member

    Messages:
    7,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    NOTHING and NO ONE human or animal is priceless (unless of course it is a death row inmate, then apparently they are worth tens of millions and basically considered "priceless").

    Negligence should absolutely, positively be penalized whether the victim is a human or non-human animal.

    I can see why the vets are nervous, sheesh I don't want to pay 5 or 10 times the cost for vet visits or surgeries due to crazy malpractice insurance either, BUT if vets are just plain negligent or if cities have morons at the animal shelter abusing and euthanizing animals without care, then yes penalties are in order to stop the negligent behavior.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice