An Oregon family seeking $1.6 million for the death of their dog cannot be compensated for loss of companionship, a judge ruled Tuesday. The judge threw out the claim but will allow the jury to decide if the family should be paid for punitive damages and intentional infliction of emotional stress, one newspaper reported. If the family had been successful in their loss of companionship claim, experts said it could have radically changed the definition of the relationship between owners and their pets.
May 24, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
An Oregon family seeking $1.6 million for the death of their dog cannot be compensated for loss of companionship, a Clackamas County judge ruled Tuesday.
The judge threw out the claim but will allow the jury to decide if the family should be paid for punitive damages and intentional infliction of emotional stress, The Oregonian newspaper reported on its Web site Tuesday.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
