HomeAnimal lawsanimal abuseSuing in civil law when a person deliberately kills your cat

Comments

Suing in civil law when a person deliberately kills your cat — 8 Comments

  1. You can sue in civil court and if there has been a criminal judgement the judge will almost always side with the plaintiff. The burden of proof is much lower in civil than criminal court. Damages may be limited to replacement and any expenses incurred trying to save the animal and sometimes reasonable cremation services. Some small claims can award punitive damages if the crime was egregious. Any punitive damages would be capped at the court maxim award usually between 3 thousand and 10 thousand. You can find out your states laws with some simple research although punitive awards may not be listed but available. You can ask in your complaint.
    I wish more people would sue deliberate acts of cruelty. Most people need to realize that if your pet is in the street and hit you will have little claim and in fact you could end up owning damages if the vehicle is damaged. However deliberate use of a car to kill an animal or turning your dog loose on it even if it’s in your yard, putting down poison, shooting an animal that is not menacing you or in most states your livestock can get you in trouble legally with the possibility of a civil suit ice cream topper.
    Collecting your award in most civil suits is up to the winner. However the money that they may not want to pay or be able to pay can be used to box up their credit for years. You may have to periodically renew a judgment that has not been collected. You can even put liens on things like homes and cars. IANAL but I had to play one in my own life.
    Letting someone get by with murdering your pet is unacceptable. Small claims filing fees are usually quite small and an even smaller consideration if you want some justice.
    Letting your pet roam is wrong. Just wrong. These little traveler thugs show what your cat or dog is in danger of facing each time they trot out of your sight. However simply being loose and does not give anyone the right to torture, kill or maim your pet. We have civil remedies for bad pet owners too.

  2. Sadly, therapy would be a waste of money because people like those two thugs are happy with their lifestyle choices and see nothing wrong with what they do. They are even the ones who brag about the death battles.

    Instead of wasting taxpayer money, toss them in a pen with the dogs they taught to kill. Then, even the playing field by limiting their ability to fight back. They deserve to experience the same thing as their victims.

  3. The reason that more people don’t pursue damages in the USA is because then the pet-owner can be fined and convicted of all the animal neglect and animal endangerment laws that exist in every county of every state of the USA. The death of their cat is clear proof that they violated those laws. None of them want to admit guilt that they killed their own cat by letting it roam at will and without supervision. The fault clearly lies with the owner in the USA, as it should.

    • Boy do you have that all wrong. One person breaking the law never justifies someone else breaking the law.
      The fines for letting a pet roam at large where it’s illegal for cats is small compared to the wreckage someone like you can and probably will do to themselves and their family.

  4. Obviously no amount of money can bring back a beloved feline friend once lost. The importance for me would be seeking justice, although in truth nothing could effect total justice in this case. Thank you for covering this topic Michael. I bookmarked the article. 😢

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>