Owner of pet that died can't sue for emotional loss

In its unanimous decision, the judges rejected the claim of David Kaufman that he is entitled to be compensated after the death of his scarlet macaw above and beyond the actual cash value of the bird.

Judge Patricia Norris said that to rule otherwise would give broader rights to pet owners to sue for emotional loss than to parents who lose a child.

The Arizona Veterinary Medical Association, which hired its own legal help to intercede, takes the position that while there is a special bond between humans and pets, the law should not permit recovery for non-economic damages. In a position paper furnished Tuesday to Capitol Media Services, the group said such lawsuits would drive up costs of veterinary services and, in doing so, put the price beyond the reach of what some owners are willing to pay, "harming animals in the process."

This case involves Salty, bought by Kaufman in late 1996. According to Norris, the bird was intelligent, affectionate and playful.

Kaufman said he considered Salty his companion who accompanied him to work, engaged with customers at Kaufman's business and participated in family holidays.

In 2005, the bird got sick, had surgery and ultimately died.

Kaufman then sued the veterinarian and the Scottsdale Veterinary Clinic. Aside from claims of medical negligence and destruction of personal property, he also asked for various "special damages," including for emotional pain and suffering and for loss of companionship.

But a trial judge told jurors they could consider only the value of the bird. Ultimately, the jury, after hearing the bird had an undiagnosed heart condition, awarded nothing to Kaufman.

In reviewing the case on appeal, Norris said most states classify pets simply as personal property. And she said they limit recovery in a wrongful-death case to the value of the animal.

Norris said there are situations in which someone can sue for emotional distress because of the loss or destruction of property.

"We recognize the reality of a pet owner's grief when his or her pet is negligently injured or killed," Norris wrote. But she said it would not be reasonable to allow claims for emotional damages in these cases when they are off limits to others who seek to sue for the loss of a close friend, grandparent, grandchild, aunts, uncles, nieces and nephews.