ABSTRACT
Companion animals are part of today’s American family. And as family members, people spend time and resources to ensure their nonhuman family members are healthy and happy. This emotional connection is increasingly being recognized and has started to permeate some areas of the law. Yet, when a companion animal is killed or injured, they continue to be valued economically by the legal system. Fair Market value is the predominant approach in damages compensation when companion animals are injured or killed. Ironically, there is nothing fair about this approach. There is a social interest in the health and well-being of companion animals that is based on the emotional bond shared with them. Sadly, after six decades, this area remains underdeveloped. Current damages available when a companion animal has been harmed cost owners their mental health and tranquility, while tortfeasors get away with the harm caused. There is an imbalance that ought to be recalibrated. Should companion animal owners be compensated for their emotional injuries when their companion animals are injured or killed? That question has been answered numerous times before. They should, indeed. This article answers a different question: how and to what extent should noneconomic damages be awarded in companion animal cases? Suggestions to expand existing causes of action, allowing noneconomic damages for trespass to chattel, and taking animals outside the property classification have been proposed. This article presents a novel legal framework that focuses on the status of companion animals within their family. Still, it is based on public policy and existing legal doctrine that is adapted to the unique situation of animals: beloved integral members of the family unit that are categorized as property by the legal system.
Vega, Angie, Companion Animals: a Legislative Proposal to Redefine Their Legal Worth (January 25, 2023), Tulane Law Review, volume 98, 2023.
Leave a Reply