New Jersey Court Dismisses Emotional Distress Claim Related to Pet Mauling

By GEOFF MULVIHILL | August 2, 2012

  • August 2, 2012 at 2:48 pm
    Mary French says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 0

    While I am not saying that McDougall was owed compensation since I don’t know all the details, I would not compare a beloved pet to a family heirloom. A pet is a living thing that has feeling and can experience pain. An heirloom is a thing with no feeling. While we might experience a sense of loss by losing or seeing a family heirloom destroyed it would not be the same as seeing your beloved pet suffer and be traumatized.

  • August 2, 2012 at 3:15 pm
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    I agree, one would certainly suffer emotional distress at seeing your beloved pet mauled to death. You would relive that senario over and over. People form very close attachments to their animals and some think of them as their children. I do think the Supreme Court has made the best decision as this would open the courts to more of people’s greed..

  • August 3, 2012 at 10:05 am
    Have Some Compassion says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    My dogs are my kids. I would be horrified and traumatized seeing them viciously attacked and killed. But I have to agree with the decision. What a horrible loss for that woman.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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