A tort is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as "a private or civil wrong or injury, other than a breach of contract, for which the court will provide a remedy in the form of an action for damages." Courts can require that damage awards be paid for injuries to a person or property as a means of compensating the injured party.
The four most common types of torts are (1) intentional torts, (2) negligence, (3) strict liability, and (4) product liability. Invasion of privacy and defamation are also considered torts.
The focus of animal rights activities with respect to torts has been primarily in the areas of intentional torts and negligence. Black's Law Dictionary attempts to explain the difference between these two torts in its definition of an intentional tort, defined as a "tort or wrong perpetrated by one who intends to do that which the law has declared wrong as contrasted with negligence in which the tort-feasor fails to exercise that degree of care in doing what is otherwise permissible." Tort liability for intentional torts is based upon the premise that a person should not intentionally injure another person or his or her property. Tort liability for negligence is based upon the premise that a person should exercise reasonable care in how he or she behaves and conducts his or her affairs.
Tort law is predominantly common law. Individual judges rather than legislatures usually define what counts as a tort and how compensation is to be measured. Courts are free to recognize variations of existing torts and even to recognize new torts at any time.
Specific torts advanced by many animal rights lawyers include (1) negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress, (2) loss of companionship, and (3) veterinary malpractice (negligence). Many animal rights lawyers are seeking higher damage awards in the form of non-economic damages in cases in which certain claims are permissible (i.e., veterinary malpractice). Because animals have always been treated as property under the law, most courts set damage awards in tort cases based upon the economic value of the animal, usually considered its purchase price.
This is an active area of law for animal rights lawyers. We will attempt to provide up-to-date information in this section as cases are heard and legislation is proposed in state courts.
NJ Lawsuit Seeking Non-Economic Damages for Killing of Pet Dog
The Baltimore Sun, Feb. 28, 2007 – A New Jersey family is seeking
compensation for witnessing the killing of their pet dog. Joyce Tischler,
founding director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), described the
case as “part of a growing trend across the country testing how the
law relates to pets.” Tischler referred to it as “cutting edge”
and “pushing the envelope.” (Please contact NABR
for more information).
Tort Watch for Animal Lovers
Washington Post, December 29, 2005
Distraught pet owners are not marching on Washington -- yet -- to win the right to sue for the loss of companionship if their dogs and cats are injured or killed. But that's not stopping lobbyists for pet-medicine manufacturers from keeping an eye on the Hill.
Read the Article
Veterinarians in the Doghouse
Richard L. Cupp, Jr. and Amber E. Dean
The Brief, Spring 2002
Read the Article (pdf)
Resolving Confusion in Pet Owner Tort Cases: Recognizing Pets' Anthropomorphic Qualities Under a Property Classification
Lynn A. Epstein
Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 2001
Read the Article (pdf)
Integrating Animal Interests Into Our Legal System
David Favre
10 Animal L. 87 (2004)
Read the article
(pdf)
Recovery of ‘Non-Economic’
Damages for Wrongful Killing or Injury of Companion Animals: A Judicial and
Legislative Trend
Sonia S. Waisman & Barbara R. Newell
7 Animal L. 45 (2001)
Read the article
(pdf)
Recovery of Common Law Damages for Emotional Distress, Loss of Society, and Loss of Companionship for the Wrongful Death of a Companion Animal
Steven M. Wise
4 Animal L. 33 (1998)
Read the article
(pdf)