dog

Animal Law Update

Washington Jury Awards Damages for “Intrinsic Value” and “Emotional Distress” Damages in Dog Shooting Case

By Nicole Pallotta, Academic Outreach Manager

In what is thought to be the largest verdict in Washington for the death of a dog, a jury has awarded $100,000 in a case involving the shooting death of Chucky, a springer spaniel whom owner Jim Anderson described as his “best friend.” Of that amount, $36,475 was awarded directly to Anderson for “intrinsic value” and “emotional distress.”

Anderson filed the civil lawsuit against his neighbor and family, one of whom shot Chucky during afternoon target practice and then attempted to cover it up. Chucky spent the night alone and gravely injured while Anderson desperately searched for him. When Anderson found Chucky the next morning he could not be saved; he died at the veterinary hospital. Anderson was represented by Bellingham animal lawyer Adam Karp.

This award is notable because noneconomic damages are not typically available in cases of wrongful death or injury to a companion animal. Although there have been some exceptions, compensation is typically limited to “fair market value” because animals are defined as property under the law. According to law professor David Favre, “… given the reality that many humans attach an emotional, personal value to their pets, the present position of the law that says that damages to property are primarily measured by the fair market value… constitutes a large disconnect between public expectations and the rules of property.” Cases like this may signal a shift by courts toward a more flexible analysis that differentiates between destruction of personal property and the death of a beloved animal.

Further reading:

Tags:

Location:

Washington

Related