Should they sue?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date

Should they sue?


  • Total voters
    2
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
A Massachusetts woman says her cat went to the veterinarian for a flea bath and was mistakenly euthanized instead.



Colleen Conlon of Gardner is grieving the loss of the cat, 8-year-old Lady, which she attributes to "negligence" by the vet.



Her son took Lady to an animal hospital last week and unknowingly authorized the cat to be put to sleep after he says he was handed the wrong forms.



He says he learned of the mix-up when he returned with a second cat and the vet asked him if he wanted to keep the bodies.



Conlon doesn't think the vet had any "malicious intent."



But she's filed a complaint with the attorney general's office.



The veterinarian didn't return a call from the Telegram & Gazette seeking comment.




http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012/09/23/cat-goes-to-vet-for-flea-bath-but-gets-euthanized/57829874/1?csp=34news
 
depends on how the vet wants to act. If he reaches out in a way to both make it right for the petowner as well as retrain the person who deals at the desk, then no. otherwise, yes.
 
depends on how the vet wants to act. If he reaches out in a way to both make it right for the petowner as well as retrain the person who deals at the desk, then no. otherwise, yes.

This sounds reasonable. But being unable to discern between a flea bath and killing the animal sounds like a serious issue.
 
This sounds reasonable. But being unable to discern between a flea bath and killing the animal sounds like a serious issue.
true, but that's the fault of both the front desk (whoever initiated the original form) and the pet owners son who signed them. IMO, the vet only did what the paperwork requested.
 
true, but that's the fault of both the front desk (whoever initiated the original form) and the pet owners son who signed them. IMO, the vet only did what the paperwork requested.

True that the paperwork is what doomed the cat, not the vet himself. But that does not relieve the vet of responsibility for what happened in his business.
 
True that the paperwork is what doomed the cat, not the vet himself. But that does not relieve the vet of responsibility for what happened in his business.
agreed, which is why i'm looking at the vets reactions and actions. is the vet being proactive in trying to prevent this from happening again while also compensating the pet owner.
 
Should business owners be liable for damages resulting from liability claims?
 
I don't understand why the vet didn't take a good look at a perfectly healthy (although flea-ridden) cat and ask why the owners wanted it put to sleep. This doesn't mean that the front desk and the son get off scot-free, though. I had to euthanize a sick cat a few years ago and the process involved several steps, not just dropping off a live cat and picking up a body.

The vet is ultimately responsible for what happens at his practice. Sounds like his staff needs a lot more training.
 
This one may or may not be one they could win. After all, her son signed the papers. Surely the papers said something about euthanizing the animal.

You're right.

Should business owners be liable for damages resulting from liability claims?
 
I don't understand why the vet didn't take a good look at a perfectly healthy (although flea-ridden) cat and ask why the owners wanted it put to sleep. This doesn't mean that the front desk and the son get off scot-free, though. I had to euthanize a sick cat a few years ago and the process involved several steps, not just dropping off a live cat and picking up a body. The vet is ultimately responsible for what happens at his practice. Sounds like his staff needs a lot more training.

True, but legally pets are property, and an owner can dispose of property regardless of it's condition.
 
Back
Top