When it comes to animals in the Texas courts of law, the most frustrating thing may be that decisions are largely based on a precedent set in 1891.
The case, Heiligmann v. Rose, dictated through the state Supreme Court if an animal is wrongly killed all the owner can recoup is the market value of the animal. The owner can’t get sentimental value or emotional damages, and yet the destruction of an inanimate object like a family heirloom can warrant huge sums be awarded.
“You’re going to allow someone to recover sentimental value for a brooch but not your dog?” asked Randy Turner, partner in the Hurst firm Turner & McKenzie P.C.
Click here for more on how Randy Turner, Don Feare and Yolanda Eisenstein are out on the forefront of Texas animal law trying to change this...
Posts
1 comment:
I'd be willing to bet that the Texas Veterinary Medical Association (TVMA) is behind this ridiculous situation. It is, after all, the veterinary lobby who time and time again defeat legislation that would recognize our pets value.
http://badvetdaily.blogspot.com
Post a Comment