Follow Up: Dogs and Divorce
I noted earlier that pets are generally seen as just another item of personal property to be distributed in a divorce. A legal view that fails to account for the prominent role pets have come to play in the emotional lives of some people today. I think that there will come a time when pets are treated more like children and less like property in a divorce. I say this based on the strong feelings I have encountered about pets, not only from clients and parties, but also from judges, attorneys and others in the “system.”
I once was involved in a divorce where an angry spouse liquidated the bulk of the parties’ personal property (garage sales, flea markets, etc.), contrary to a restraining order. The trouble with this type of malfeasance is determining the penalty. Personal property never amounts to much in the way of value. Used stuff does not have much value in our society. The judge was predictably unmoved by the spouse’s misdeeds, until we got to the parties’ dog. The angry spouse took the dog to the pound while the divorce was pending. My client was crushed and we never could track the dog down. The judge was furious, calling the action cruel and heartless.
Keeping up with this trend, the Stark County Law Library Blawg (always an excellent site), points today to a story from Canada where a judge ordered the husband in a divorce to pay $200 per month to his divorcing wife for the upkeep of Crunchy, a St. Bernard. The article concludes:
But U.S. courts are increasingly ruling pets are more akin to children. American judges have begun to rule on joint custody, visitation rights and support payments.
The result is a whole new branch of litigation and legal websites dedicated to fighting for the rights of a pet in the event of a divorce.
I have not found too many court decision to back up these claims, and if the websites are out there, I would sure like to find them . . . .
