Judge Judy is wrong in the matter of a cat who scratches a dog’s eye

Judge Judy
Judge Judy

The video shows an extract of a judge Judy case. The sound is hard to hear. I have heard it several times and the scenario is as follows:

https://youtu.be/vhGSavj5UGU

The claimant was walking her dog on a lead in what she described as the front yard but I believe this to be a public area or an area used by people living in a condominium. She was walking next to some garages. Her dog, inquisitively, sniffed in the area of some bushes. In those bushes was a tabby cat which the claimant says belongs to the defendant.

The cat attacked the dog, scratching the dog’s eye which required $4000 of veterinary treatment at the end of which the dog lost her eye. The claimant/plaintiff was looking for a court judgement that she be reimbursed for four thousand dollars. She got her award – judge Judy awarded $4000 to the claimant to be paid by the defendant.

The defendant said that the cat was not his. Judge Judy found that the cat was his and that he should have had his cat on a lead or kept his cat indoors and because his cat had damaged this woman’s dog he had to pay her compensation due to his irresponsibility.

I find judge Judy’s judgement incorrect the following reasons:

Firstly, she makes an all-encompassing statement that this man’s cat should have been on a lead or very closely supervised. However, she made no reference to any state or local laws which requires that a cat be on a lead. The fact that she made no reference to any such law indicates to me that it does not exist in that area (or, as Sandy in a comment states, that it is accepted that outdoor cats are supervised). It has to be said, in the USA, today, there are many laws which are gradually encroaching upon the historically free-roaming nature of the domestic cat.

It must be an omission by the judge that she made no attempt to modify her judgement on the basis that there is no law (ordinance) regarding cats being on leashes or kept indoors, or she appears to make no reference to any leash-law should it exist, in her judgment. That’s the first problem as I see it. Incidentally, the judge seems to have taken the view that cats are like dogs and can put on a lead without any problems. Cats do not like leads and they won’t follow their “owner” like a dog.

The second problem is that the dog had approached the cat (as I understand it), albeit that both the dog owner and the dog were unaware of the cat’s presence as the cat was in bushes. However, the cat would have been intimidated and defensively aggressive. The cat’s behaviour was defensive and reactive.

Judge Judy likens the action of this cat to attacking prey, which is extraordinary. She discusses the behaviour of cats attacking birds with the defendant and then likens that to what the cat did to the dog. This is completely incorrect because cats do not willy-nilly attack dogs as prey. Therefore judge Judy was wrong again.

I would judge this incident as “an act of nature”. In effect it was an accident (from a human standpoint), the coming together of two species of animal, inadvertently, without any malice or bad behaviour on the part of either the claimant or the defendant.

Therefore, there should have been no award of compensation. It was just bad luck. If on the other hand judge Judy wished to award some compensation to the woman she should have taken into account the fact that the dog, albeit perhaps inadvertently, was the aggressor and therefore there was an element of contributory negligence or misbehaviour from the dog’s owner. This should reduce the award to about half of what it is.

There is one last issue: if this occurred in a private area there may be rules on cats entering private areas and losing their ‘rights’.

Those are my thoughts on this at this stage. Do you have any? It is a case which goes to the heart of the indoor/outdoor cat debate and whether free-roaming cats are acceptable nowadays.


Judge Judy is an American television show. She is a real judge but her judgements on the show are not binding in the usual way but via a contract between the parties.

55 thoughts on “Judge Judy is wrong in the matter of a cat who scratches a dog’s eye”

  1. Yeah I’m a secret cat hater who “pounces just like a cat”. You people can’t be really with your nuttiness.

  2. Beating your chest because you think I won’t reply huh? What was your first clue? The fact that I last replied in 2016? Well unfortunately for you I ALWAYS reply if I am notified.

    “Cats kill birds and rodents ONLY not animals!”

    IF you believe that birds and rodents are not animals you are hopelessly mentally deficient and I can’t help you in any way. Maybe it was a typo, but I just can’t figure out what you might have actually meant?

    “You said it’s not nature. REALLY? It’s not?”

    YUP. REALLY. IT’S NOT. Nature is the state of the ecosystem without modern human interference. Your pet is domesticated vermin that has been brought here from overseas and is not part of the natural world. Furthermore it is your PET and it is being fed, so any animals it kills are NOT for survival and it is completely unnecessary prolonged suffering.

    A cougar running around would be hunting to survive. A pet cat often ABANDONS its kill or eats it partially. Your cat is already eating those “slaughtered and abused” farm animals do it DOESN’T NEED TO KILL MORE you dolt.

    Feel better now?

  3. I 100% agree Judge Judy is wrong. However, like someone said, the show pays the winning party not the defendant. It’s not even close to as much as they said. Each party gets only $200 for being on the show. It is only small claims court. The most anyone can get is $3000. The defendant still gets $200 whether they win or lose the case. I know I was on Judge Mathis.

  4. WoW what an AHOLE! I doubt you will even see my reply and if you do you wouldn’t reply anyway since you didn’t have the balls to reply back to anyone else but I’m going to comment back to you anyway. It will make me feel better lol.
    I agree that all cats should be indoor cats mostly for their own safety. Alot of cat owners don’t agree and it doesn’t mean that everyone who lets their cat outside neglects it. Accidents do happen. Perhaps it was an indoor cat and got out by mistake and was scared and may be why he was hiding in the bushes. Whether or not that is the case the cat acted on instinct. Just like if someone comes around the corner to suddenly scare someone, if that someone had been attacked sometime in the past, they might automatically punch the jokester instinctively without thinking about it.

    You also said, “You already have the privilege to let your pet roam on my property and slaughter animals for fun. NO, it’s not nature, you mouth-breathing cat nutter.”

    Let’s start with the first sentence. Cats slaughter animals in your yard just for fun? Do you have cougars running around slaughtering animals? Cats don’t slaughter animals. The meat you eat was brutally slaughtered but I bet your just fine with that aren’t you!? You pay farmers to abuse and slaughter 100s of animals. But I’m getting off track.
    Cats kill birds and rodents ONLY not animals! Not because it was fun. It IS INSTINCT to kill birds and rodents to eat so they can survive.

    Which brings us to the 2nd sentence. You said it’s not nature. REALLY? It’s not? And you have the nerve to call someone that thinks so an idiot? This shows you are completely ignorant and uneducated.

    Mouth breathing cat nutter? WHAT!? Who taught you to insult people? LoL. Everyone has breathed out of their mouth at one time or another. Cat nutter. Yes I am thank you very much. Facts have shown that being a cat lover is a sign of high intelligence.

    Which bring up another point. The crap you said about the dead cats is cruel and disgusting. But your obviously proud to be cruel and disgusting. Otherwise, you wouldn’t even be on this website since you have such a disdain for cats.

    Oh wow I just saw that you are a girl. That makes you even more disgusting.

Leave a Comment

follow it link and logo