Dumb judge overruled in wiener dog court case

When Molly, a Springfield Dachshund, was viciously attacked in her own backyard by a neighbour’s dog, her owners paid almost $5,000 in vet bills to save her life. Then, they sued the owner of the attack dog to get their money back. Unfortunately, the 11th Circuit Court Judge, Paul Lawrence, was an idiot and ruled that Molly was only worth $200 and therefore all her owners should get was $200.

Thank goodness the case was appealed and a panel of judges overruled the logic-impaired first judge. The State Journal-Register reports:

On New Year’s Eve, appellate court Justices Thomas Appleton, Sue Myerscough and Robert Steigmann agreed. Appleton wrote the decision. The crux of it is that Molly’s market value at the time of the attack was negligible. The judges questioned whether anyone would pay $200 for a 7-year-old dachshund that was not a show dog.

But, Appleton wrote, the Leiths “demonstrated how much Molly is worth to them by paying $4,784 for the dog’s veterinary care.” The family, said the court, should be awarded the full amount.

The attack dog owner has not said whether or not he will appeal. Whatever he does, the Daily Doxie hopes he loses. And it would be good if Judge Lawrnce wasn’t re-elected either.

2 thoughts on “Dumb judge overruled in wiener dog court case

  1. Matt

    How odd. In a case where a child was injured they wouldn’t try to calculate a child’s value. (And if they did it would surely be negative as children are very costly.)

    It amazes me that some people still see dogs as objects or merely property.

    I wonder if it was a legal issue that prevented them from throwing out the “value” logic all together. I noticed how they said the dog’s value must have been higher because the owner was willing to pay it.

    Either way, this ruling essentially squashes any attempts to limit damages to resale values on dogs.


Comments are closed.