Press overstates Florida pet status decision

Broward County, Fla.-What national news agencies report as a "potential landmark case" concerning a Florida appellate ruling to allow emotional distress claims related to a pet's death is an exaggeration, legal experts say.

Broward Circuit Judge J. Leonard Fleet, described as sympathetic to the human-animal bond, was just doing his job last month when he ruled that a jury could consider a suit claiming emotional distress for the loss of a dog. Media reports suggest that if the jury awards such damages, a legal precedent would be set that could sweep the nation.

But attorney Gregory Dennis, president of the American Veterinary Medical Law Association (AVMLA) disagrees. Florida joins Hawaii and Louisiana as the nation's only states recognizing emotional distress damages due to the death of pets. A ruling blocking the case would have been made in err, Dennis says, as precedent for the decision was set in 1978.

"This case is being pounded with mass media coverage claiming there will be a revolutionary landmark decision that will spread across the country," he says. "This isn't cutting new law. Florida has recognized for more that 20 years that it's possible to make emotional suffering claims in a negligent setting against veterinarians."

The 1978 appellate court ruling in Knowles Animal Hospital, Inc. v. Helen Wills determined that the trial judge did not err in a veterinary malpractice action when awarding mental pain and suffering damages stemming from injury to the client's dog. An appeal was filed, but the Florida Supreme Court denied its review.

Applying a precedent

That decision has eased the way for this latest malpractice lawsuit against a veterinarian and the clinic where he formerly worked. Riff v. Welleby Veterinary Medical Center and John Willie seeks damages for breach of contract, malpractice and emotional damages suffered in June 2001, when plaintiffs Adam and Ellen Riff dropped off their 8-year-old dog to have its teeth pulled and returned to find it dying. The defense claims the dog died from a pre-existing condition.

While the concept of emotional distress is allowed, it will be interesting to see what the jury awards and judge upholds should the plaintiffs win, says Dr. Duane Flemming, attorney and AVMLA past president.

"The real legal question comes about with whether or not the appellate court will allow damages over and above the cost of the animal for emotional distress for the loss of that animal," he says. "The majority of states have held that the law does not allow for those kinds of damages."