Animal rights drive dog lawsuit

Michael and Kathryn Sutton aren’t activists. They never envisioned joining any movement.

Yet, the Ellijay couple find themselves at the forefront of a legal battle aimed at elevating the status of animals under the law. Their fight could redefine veterinary care — and the relationship between humans and animals.

Enlarge this image

Family photo

Marshall, a miniature Schnauzer, was owned for 13 years by Michael and Kathryn Sutton, who filed a malpractice suit last month against their veterinarian.

• BLOG: What do you think? Do you agree?

Pets stories

• 2 Georgia canines earn shot at Dogs of Valor Award 
• Vinings water dog rockets to fame 
• Cobb man left 35 cats home alone, police say 
• Agility class wins over dog, owner 
• Gwinnett clears the way for supervised tethering of dogs 

• Back to AJCPETS
• Find Atlanta volunteer opportunities for pet lovers.

Recent headlines:

• Georgia State gets grant to study school bullying 
• Delta flight to Atlanta diverted to Chattanooga 
• State Masonic group withdraws charges 

   • Metro and state news

Last month, the Suttons filed a lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court charging their former veterinary surgeon with doggy malpractice for her treatment of Marshall, the Suttons’ beloved 13-year-old miniature Schnauzer.

The unusual suit claims Marshall would still be alive today if it weren’t for the poor care of Sandy Springs-based vet Julie Duval.

Duval, who works out of Sandy Springs-based Georgia Veterinary Specialists, contends she did nothing wrong.

“I treated that dog like I would my own,” Duval said. “I’m comfortable with that.”

But the Suttons say the unnecessary loss of a beloved family member and constant companion has left them both empty and angry.

They are seeking at least $75,000 in damages for their loss.

“Money is not the object here,” said Kathryn Sutton. “I don’t want someone else to have to go through what we did. I still cry over this. I probably lost 20 pounds. I didn’t eat or sleep well for three or four months. “

Georgia, like most states, considers pets personal property, such as a table or chair.

However, some pet advocates and their lawyers contend “companion” animals should be treated as humans because they have the ability to experience suffering and often are valued family members.

The companion animal-rights movement has the support of national and international groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the Animal Legal Defense Fund and International Society for Animal Rights.

Courts and legislators have taken notice, too.

In 2004, an Orange County, Calif., jury recognized the “special value” of a Labrador retriever and awarded the owner $39,000 in a malpractice suit.

Courts also have accepted trusts for the care of pets and have awarded custody of animals after a divorce. And, more and more law schools are teaching animal law as either a course or area of study.

The status of animals under the law has profound impacts in courts, homes and veterinary offices.

As property, dogs, cats or other animals are limited in value to their replacement value or purchase price. And, without the potential for huge awards, malpractice lawsuits are rarely undertaken.

The American Veterinary Medical Association wants to make sure that doesn’t change.

They argue elevated status for animals will create a market for lawyers to sue for malpractice. Lawsuits, they say, will drive up the cost of insurance and care for animals.

Right now most vets pay only about $500 a year for malpractice insurance because suits are so unusual, the veterinary association said.

“We just don’t think filing a bunch of lawsuits helps,” said Adrian Hochstadt, a lobbyist for the association.

The Suttons believe Marshall died an agonizing, painful death with his abdomen inflamed from peritonitis.

That image haunts Michael Sutton, who says Marshall’s loss can’t be measured. He noted Marshall was with the couple nearly every hour of every day for 13 years.

Duval stressed that the state board reviewed the Suttons’ complaint and in February found no reason to sanction her. She added that she, like the other doctors in the practice, all have expertise and education to do the kind of difficult procedures they take on referral.

She described the suit as “meritless.”

However, the malpractice agreed the debate over animal rights may one day tip toward special rules for companion animals and that veterinary malpractice cases may evolve into costly, high-stakes contests.

“I just hope this isn’t the one,” Duval said.