Vermont Court Rules Against Emotional Damages for Pets
The Vermont Supreme Court in May affirmed a lower court decision to disallow noneconomic damages in pet litigation.
The court explained in its ruling that emotional damages generally are not available even for the loss of close relatives. Therefore, it was unwilling to expand the law to provide recovery options for pets that are not provided for humans.
“Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate a compelling reasons why, as a matter of public policy, the law should offer broader compensation for the loss of a pet than would be available for the loss of a friend, relative, work animal, heirloom or memento—all of which can be prized beyond measure, but for which this state’s law does not recognize recovery for sentimental loss.”
The Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (Washington) was one of several organizations, including the Animal Health Institute, a Washington-based association representing manufacturers of animal health products, that filed a joint “friend of the court” brief urging the Vermont high court to rule against emotional damages. They argued in part that medical costs would become unaffordable for many pet owners if the pain-and-suffering liability were allowed.
Nearly 30 state courts have reaffirmed the longstanding legal principle that emotional damages are not allowed in pet litigation, according to AHI. [July 2009 PET AGE]
 |
