How much do you trust your vet?
An Elijay couple are grieving the death of their 13-year-old miniature Schnauzer, Marshall. Grief also accompanies anger. Michael and Kathryn Sutton believe Marshall would still be alive today if it weren’t for what they describe as the poor care by their former vet.
The Suttons now have a lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court charging Sandy Springs-based vet Julie Duval with doggy malpractice.
The couple want at least $75,000 in damages for their loss. (They say it isn’t about money because they say the pet is irreplaceable.) The vet says she treated Marshall like her own.
This case underscores a thought that pet owners might have had one time or another: ‘How much do I trust my vet?’
Under what circumstances would you sue your vet? What would you do if you were Marshall’s owner? What do you think about this case?
Share This
If it were evident that my pet suffered at the hands of his/her doctor, I would definitely sue. Our pets are part of our family and when they die it is no less painful for us then we lose a human family member.
Request a comment be removed
I’d have to know all the facts and hear both sides as there are always people you can’t please and who knows if these owners are some of those people. I’m not against them suing as I wish I had sued a past vet myself.
We had used Dr. Lavender with I believe it was North Atlanta Animal Hospital in Sandy Springs (I believe he has moved), I went to him with my Shepherd who had what to me was an obvious fungal infection on one of her toes. He blew it off, said it was nothing…I sent my husband back a few weeks later, this time he told us to buy an over the counter fungal medication if I really think it would help, again, “it was nothing and would clear up on it’s own.” Of course, the fact that the nail now was turning “spongy” and green still didn’t elicit any responses from this negligent vet. So, after going to GVS and getting a referral to a different vet office and them giving me a referral to a dermatologist to have the nail biopsied and sent to CO for testing I went to a 3rd vet @ Pet’s are People Too in Roswell and it was confirmed to me that in fact she had a fungal infection from the start and it had spread so far that our only option was to have the toe amputated. The vets @ Pet’s are People too told me that if Dr. Lavender had listened to me and had put her on oral medications from the beginning it would have taken care of the problem. Instead my dog who was barely over a year old ends up costing me over $4000!! Dr. Lavender should be held responsible for his negligence and he should have paid for everything we had to put my poor dog through.
I think vet’s who are negligent should ABSOLUTELY be held responsible as I had seen first hand that there are some in the profession just for the money and there are some in the profession because they really do care.
Not only did Lavender lose us as a customer, he lost 2 other members of my family. One dog, he had the owner “Douche” ok, weird huh? The other dog had a “bump” on her back that he said was nothing…again, after leaving his office and going to Pet’s are People too, they find that the growth was dangerous and had to be surgically removed. People like Lavender make me sick and should be held accountable and face malpractice lawsuits.
Request a comment be removed
I trust my vet, but you do hear of neglect by vets. I just want to say that the love we have for our “best friend” is special ,growing all the time as unlike family they have unconditional love. I sure do not want to hear of an animal being mistreated!
Request a comment be removed
I’m sorry for their loss, but a lawsuit of this type will have the uninteded consequence of all pet owners paying more everytime we go to the vet. 13 years is a long life for a dog I would suggest they move on with their lives.
Request a comment be removed
Lord, what is our society coming too? Next we will learn that some nut wants to marry his dog.
I have had pets all my life, from an alligator to numerous cats and dogs. I also have spent a lot of time on a working farm where the animals were “tools” to make the farm productive.
If my pet was improperly injured by a Vet, or anyone, I would seek redress, but as damage to my property not as if it were to a human.
Jeez! Such frivolus actions do not uplift animals, it cheapens human life.
Request a comment be removed
I think it is a ridiculaous law suit. I am sick of people always suing because it is us (the people) that end of paying for it in the long run. A dod is a dog, I have a do g too and love him dearly but he stays outside and fetches the tennis ball. It is not like human life. If it not about money then why don’t they give the money to charity if they win their case? These kind of people drive me crazy with the way they act about their dogs. Why don’t you put your time and energy into things that really matter like homelessness, child abuse, and world hunger.
Request a comment be removed
Ooh, it’s a tough call. It is worrisome that people actually believe getting pets on a par with people for legal reasons will be a good thing. It sounds OK on the surface, but it could lead, as some have suggested, to way higher vet bills and less vets because of malpractice suits (this is happening in human medicine right now).
Another unintended consequence of pets=people is that someone will eventually have the authority to tell you how to provide for, confine, and train your pet. We already have laws that address abject cruelty. We don’t need the government telling us that “crating is cruel” or something else ridiculous like that. That’s why I oppose the term “guardian” for pet owners.
As for this couple, I feel for them. Losing a pet is never easy, especially when you believe negligence is involved. The dog obviously had a long and happy life, yes; I would not sue because my pet was gone necessarily, but I might if I thought it would help to censure the vet who had been negligent.
Vets are human; stuff happens. They certainly should not be allowed to practice if they are harming animals or bilking people, but most are not.
I will be anxious to see the outcome of this case. It’s ramifications could extend pretty far.
As with most every thorny issue in life, this one is not black or white.
Request a comment be removed
I understand that dogs are not human however they are a big part of a lot of people’s lives. Man knows no other purer form of love than that from a dog! If a vet by his negligence caused the untimely death of my dog yes I would pursue legal action. However in my case I would have to have corroborating evidence from other Vets that negligence was the ultimate cause of his demise. Death is a part of life and unfortunately comes to all of our beloved pets and most pet owners deal with it appropriately. If these pets owners have evidence that the Vet’s negligence hastened the death of their pet I support them.
Request a comment be removed
These folks need to grow up. Its certainly tough to lose a pet but it was an old dog. The consequences of this lawsuit would be that all vets would be forced to practice defensively. “Your dog vomited? Better do an MRI”. A lot a people are dissuaded from owning a dog now due to the costs involved. Would you want the costs doubled or tripled?
Now, if the dog were intentionally killed by an evil neighbor, I would support an award in excess of the animal’s fair market value, but that’s not the case here.
Request a comment be removed
I read this story with interest, when the paper came this morning. It started to make me mad, when once again, only part of the story is being told. Is it intentional, to censor what we read, or is the reporter or their editor at fault?
This article touches on some inflammatory topics, pets, doctors, vets, death, sorrow, but is does not answer the important question: WHAT DO THE SUTTONS THINK THE VET DID WRONG? It’s pretty stupid to sue just because the pet died, if they don’t think the Veterinarian did something wrong. Further, they should have a good IDEA what the vet. did wrong. And to make it NEWS, the AJC could consider telling us what that is. That would professional though…right?
/..
Request a comment be removed
Well, I read the entire article, and there is nothing here to discuss:
The article didn’t give us either side of the story……..So what is there to discuss yet?
If you told us the vet’s side, we’d understand 1/2. We don’t know the condition, diagnosis, procedure(s) performed……..Horrible article.
If you told us the pet owner’s side, we’d understand the other 1/2! We don’t know why they feel the vet failed (the writer began to tell us how they believed he died in the end, but then stopped), we’d have something to discuss…Horrible article, again!
To just say, “Oh, these people are suing..” and put up a discussion is pointless. I read the article this morning and couldn’t believe the writer’s editor let him/her submit it w/ only 5-10% of the story there for us. The main points aren’t even included!
Someone needs to write the article over! What do they believe the vet missed? They eluded to it being a referral of a tricky procedure — who referred? What was the tricky procedure? Do they believe another procedure should have been done — or that it was just done correctly?
Someone please rewrite it so we know what’s going on and we can discuss it! Obviously, many details cannot be revealed when there is a lawsuit, but an article can still be made!
Request a comment be removed
I am sorry for their loss however this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit. Julie Duval was my dog, Zoe’s, surgeon when she was near death and Dr. Duval saved her life. She was a wonderful doctor and I am grateful everyday for the amazing care she provided my dog and the support she gave me and my family.
Request a comment be removed
Just another example of frivolous lawsuits. Dog ambulance chasers. I have three golden retrievers: 12 and 7 years, and 7 months. I love my dogs and feel they are a part of the family. But if one passes on, I’ll get another. Duh! What is wrong with our society. It is a waste of our taxpayer dollars (court time) and will raise our vetrinary costs. Dumb, dumb and dumber…
Request a comment be removed
Tsk,Tsk,Tsk! Romelus and remulus descendants no doubt,crying over cats and dogs.They have been too busy buying clothes for these animals to notice their government just slaughtered over a million innocent Iraqis over false pretenses.God,when will you destroy these glib,scrofulous mongrels?
Request a comment be removed
My comment is as follow - I am in complete agreement with the lawsuit. I had a very bad (dead dog) experience with GVS and the same Doctor. I was told improvements needed to be made in the customer service department, not the medical department. I was given ZERO information as to options. The vets met my dog at 10AM and the dog was dead at 5PM the next day. WOW, they were real familiar with the case, weren’t they? Comments welcomed happy GVS customers!!!
Request a comment be removed
Gook luck !!! I hope this is the case that makes vets accountable for their actions.
Two years ago our Rotti was put through unnecessary surgery by a national chain vet clinic. They then failed to prescribe a sufficient amount of antibiotics to help him heal. When we took him back an hour before they closed a few days later the vet refused to see us because it was so close to closing and referred us to an emergency clinic.
We took him to a local chain vet service who verbally told us the initial surgery was most-likely not necessary and was shocked by the low dose of antibiotics they prescribed… unfortunately she wouldn’t document any of this information in order for us to take action against the original vet.
Vets are in a “good old boys” club that needs to be held accountable.
For those of us without children pets are the substitute. Vets know that and take advantage of it when they charge us… it’s time we make them accountable.
Request a comment be removed
We trust our vet implicitly, but they have never given us a reason not too. I did have a problem with one vet in their practice once - he was inexperienced at the time, and I made my opinion known. I don’t hesitate to question my vet or any treatment and everyone else should feel the same. My vet had to build up that level of trust - and believe me, they earned it.
I agree that we can’t really discuss this article as there are no details. I don’t understand WHY they won’t tell us what the Suttons think the vet did wrong.
Request a comment be removed
As someone that works in veterinary medicine, I believe the general public should not be so quick to file malpractice suits against veterinarians. If this trend were to continue, you will see the cost of even annual vaccines for your pets, sky rocket. Veterinarians will have to pay a high cost for malpractice insurance (like human doctors), and that cost will be transferred to the clients. I do believe that veterinarians (like human doctors), should be held responsible for any failure to treat a pet appropriatley. I just do not believe that is what happend in this case. Veterinary medicine is not an exact science and 13 year old pets can have surgical complications. The veterinarian named in this case is both a fabulous surgeon and a wonderful doctor. I would trust her with anyone of my pets.
Request a comment be removed
I agree with an earlier post; we don’t have all the facts and shouldn’t be passing judgment on either the vet or the owners. I do know this - Julie Duval and the hospital staff at GVS saved the life of my dog earlier this year. I know I’m just one person with my single experience, but she performed a very tricky surgery with a great outcome.
I know these folks are grieving the loss of their dog (and I would be, too, had things come out another way in my situation.) I understand that they are heartbroken. The toughest thing about having a pet as a family member is that he or she will never live as long as we wish; if only we knew more about what actually happened in this case we might be able to talk intelligently about whether or not a lawsuit is appropriate. If not, then don’t do it. It’s already expensive enough to use specialty level vet care.
Do something to honor Marshall and his life. I’m sure he gave you his all. Set up a fund for emergency care for folks who can’t afford it or sign on to help a rescue group. Let him live on through your generosity to others.
Request a comment be removed
I feel for the Suttons, but the article never mentions what they feel she did wrong.
Dr. Duval saved our dog’s life. We went to 3 vets before her and none could figure a cure. She performed surgery and saved his life. We had such a great experience there. He had better care than most humans get. The staff was terrific, and caring. Without Dr. Duval’s help, our puppy would have died.
She also saved the life of my best friend’s dog who had cancer.
We had follow up calls from the vet for nearly a year after surgery checking on his well being. I cannot believe that any one at her facility would not do everything possible to save a dog’s life.
I don’t have all the facts of the event, but I can tell you from experience, that she is one of the best out there.
Request a comment be removed
Yep just more of the same shoddy reporting from Cox.
I beleive that if the vet wins in this case they should sue the AJC…..
Request a comment be removed
You trust your vet just like you trust any other doctor or professional you have hired to perform a service. If that service was not performed, or not performed satisfactorily, you should have some remedy for that, no matter whether it was a person or a pet. Our dogs were like family to us, too, and we did everything we could for each of them.
Request a comment be removed
Note: I am not a lawyer, just a law student. These are my personal views based on my current study of the law regarding medical malpractice and negligence.
A normal medical doctor can be held liable for breaching his duty of care to his patient, so why not a veterinarian? The standard of care for doctors is the reasonable and prudent professional of the same skills and knowledge, and use of those skills and knowledge; for a veterinarian, the patient is an animal instead of a human. The duty of care does not differ between animals and humans - as an extension of the animal, the veterinarian owes a duty of care to the owners to treat the animal to the best of his or her ability and to the best of his or her skills and knowledge, as a reasonable and prudent professional in the same profession would.
My dog is my family; he is all I have out here in an unfamiliar state, and I consider him as my CHILD. I expect my veterinarian to treat him with the same skill and knowledge as I would expect from my own personal doctor, and anything less than that is a breach of the veterinarian’s duty of care.
Request a comment be removed
My 13 year old dog died too. It was a few weeks after she had her teeth cleaned, and some cysts removed. I was told having teeth cleaned could be dangerous to an older dog because bacteria could get in the blood stream. Doc said nah, it is fine. I was riddled with guilt for a year over it, but finally forgave myself. I did nothing wrong. I am not sure why my dog died, I did not pay for a narcopsy. I wanted to believe the doc did something wrong. 13 years is a long time for a dog though, and she had a good life. Sure, I wanted to blame the doctor, maybe she got an infection or something, how come he didnt know something was wrong? She died suddenly, so no idea what happened. Either way, the dog is dead, I had to accept it. What was I supposed to do, live in pain and suffering forever? Let it go. The dog had a great life at 13 years. Let it go… I am interested however in why they say it was malpractice. What did the doctor do wrong?
Request a comment be removed
If a vet commits malpractice then yes, I believe they should be held accountable. Aside from a few people who commented here, most dog owners don’t view their dog simply as property- easily replaced if it passes on. Most of us dog owners have a tremendous bond with our dog, and our dog is part of our family.
This article does not go into the details of this case, so it’s a poor example of whether or not the people were justified in suing. If you want to read a story that clearly illustrates continued vet negligence, go to petjustice.com and you will most probably agree vets like this need to be held accountable for their acctions. Several pets died at this vet due to bacteria infections caught at the vet office.
Request a comment be removed
I used to trust our Vet. When my beloved dog developed a cough I was told, “give him antibiotics” “His cough is nothing to worry about” “We will give him an allergy shot, that should do it.” Finally, “If it doesn’t get better we will X-Ray his lungs.” He died 2 days later. At least he passed in his sleep. I should have insisted on X-rays at the beginning. But you trust your Vet to do all they can to heal your baby. My baby was my constant companion for almost 13 years. Where I was, you saw him. His Death has been extremely painful
for me. I keep expecting him to be there.
He was a rescue from an abusive owner, and it breaks my heart to know his last days, he may have been in pain. My last memory of him was of him sitting by the bed watching me as I left for work. 2 hours later he was gone. In the same spot laying down in is sleepy position.
Request a comment be removed
If you honestly believe the vet did not do his/her job or performed it poorly, I say to go ahead and sue. There are consequences for not doing your job. A beloved indoor family cat died while in the care of a vet for a bath, nail trim, ear clean & check up. The staff was advised that the cat needed to be medicated prior to the bath because he seems to be terrified of water (he was adopted so not sure about his history.) They did not medicate him and I get a call at work that he has died while in their “care.” He supposedly died of a heart attack. Although they never found any issues with his heart prior to this visit. Trying leaving work early using “my cat just died” as an excuse. No one understands. The vet was kind enough to put “Vinnie” on ice so that we could stop by and say our good-byes. We feel your pain. If you think there was neglect or poor care, go ahead and sue. It is your right.
Request a comment be removed
Hoorah for the Sutton’s!! It’s long past due that our special “family members” have more rights than our furniture. I don’t know if the Vet was right or wrong here. I don’t think that’s the point. I belive that the issue here is having the right - UNDER THE LAW - to consider animals to be more important than the couch. If something lives, breathes, and feels pain, it should be given status ABOVE furniture.
Request a comment be removed
The ramification of a lawsuit like this will be 1000’s of other peoples pets will suffer. If they win or lose malpractice insurance will go up, more people will sue for pain and suffering, and some vet’s will simply close up and get out. As prices rise people will see cost for basic care triple or more and they will avoid taking their animals to the vet. Others will simply abandon their pets. This is ridicules and should be thrown out.
Request a comment be removed
I lost a presa canario (2yo) after taking her in to get her fixed. She never recovered. The vet said she had bad kidneys but he never tested her. In order to make a claim I had to take her body to Athens and get her examined and if they found something I would be compensated. I wasnt going to do that. I think the limit is $5000 or so. The vets are real good at recommending all these prescriptions and taking your money but when its time to stand behind their work they flee.
I haven’t taken my dogs to a vet since and they’re just fine. If they do die it’ll be by natural cause. I can live with that.
Studies are showing all these vacines and prescriptions arent good for the dogs anyway. But they’re great for profits.
Request a comment be removed
Oh my God! I just lost a very dear dog. It saddened me for months. BUT, he was a dog, not a human. As much as it hurt to lose a good animal, we have to be careful not to confuse the line between humans and animals. Ridiculous.
Request a comment be removed
Please dismiss this lawsuit and move on. Your dog had a good life.
Request a comment be removed
I am confused. The article doesn’t really specify what the “malpractice” is. I mean, if the vet was negligent or misinformed the family then yes, she should be sued. If you pay someone for a service they should do what you are paying them for… especially when a life is at stake.
Request a comment be removed
Loss of a pet is unfortunate and I have cried each and every time that I’ve had a pet pass, but I have to say they are not people. As so, they should not have the rights of people extended to them. Fair treatment, safe environments, and proper care and feeding are things that all life should have. Extending the right to sue for something like this is way past reasonable. “Pets are people, too” is a catchy slogan, but it not a fact nor should it be. Life changes, we grow old, and death comes to us all.
Request a comment be removed
We have a Great Dane that is absolutely a member of our family. Twice in the past 18 months, he was in grave danger and almost died. Dr. Duval was on the case and did an amazing job. Because of his large size, surgery is even more difficult to perform and all of the vets and staff at GVS were fantastic. We feel we owe our dog’s life to these people and recommend them all of the time to others and will continute to do so. I feel for the Suttons and would be devestated if anything happened to our dog, but with GVS I would feel comfortable knowing that everything possible would have been done by these board certified surgeons. I am afraid that the Suttons are falling to the American Way of SUE SUE SUE!!!
Request a comment be removed
I find it very interesting there are happy GVS customers commenting on how great Duval is (within minutes of each others posts). My dog almost died last year due to Duval’s negligence. She was cold and unconcerned in every phone call we had while my dog was in intensive care. I know for a fact the vets there make a high commission of every dollar brought in to the facility therefore the longer my dog stayed in ICU with an ‘unkown’ prognosis, the more money Duval made.
I requested a different doctor that actually took the time to speak with me on a regular basis and find out what was really wrong. Duval did not seem to care that my dog was taken out of her care in the least and made no apologies for the terrible hands-off service she gave me and my dog, at a rate of over $450 a day! I hope Duval loses her license as a result of this. She is lucky animals cannot speak. All of those talking about frivoulous lawsuits have not spent thousands on their pet or suffered through their illness, or just do not connect to animals like us pet lovers.
Request a comment be removed
If you are not a GVS customer, then don’t comment. I am an unhappy GVS customer who got “processed” by this practive. The suit should be filed. I have the facts, and most of you who are responding with comments do not have facts, just emotions. GVS, time to consider your past that will catch you!
Request a comment be removed
This argument stating that vets should not be sued because malpractice insurance will go up and they will pass along the cost is ridiculous!
A pet owner has every right to expect that their vet be competent in his/her abilities to treat their pet. If the vet is not competent, then a pet owner also has a right to hold him/her accountable. If a vet does not want to be held accountable then perhaps they should close up shop and change professions.
If a vet is competent at his/her job then the likelihood of being sued is very low. If this case is allowed to proceed, it’s very unlikely that you’ll see an increase in lawsuits, merely a change in the remedies sought. Lawsuits are expensive for BOTH parties, and any attorney worth a grain of salt will not take such a case unless it has true merit. The courts HATE frivolous lawsuits, and come down very hard on the attorneys that bring them.
Request a comment be removed
If the Suttons feel they’re right, then sue the vet! I hope they win too!
Request a comment be removed
If you receiving poor service from a vet. Go to a different vet. If I don’t like my doctor, I go elsewhere. Enough people leave, they change the way they do business or close. Sorry you lost your dog…Get another one.
Request a comment be removed
Though I sympathize with these folks giving them $75k is nuts.
Also, if you elevate the rights of pets to that of people, get ready for your vet bills to go absolutely sky high, and don’t be surprised when the law comes to arrest you, the pet owner fo neglect when you don’t take you pet to the vet as often as you should.
Request a comment be removed
True, pets are not people. Very, very true. They are superior. Not under the law, but in fact. The way to harmonize the law with the truth is to present a case (such as the instant one), prevail at trial and then have the judgment affirmed on appeal. Remember, if you see a puppy and a baby in the middle of the road, save the puppy. And, to you canine-haters: try spelling “god” backwards.
Request a comment be removed
Re: Unhappy GVS Customer - I certainly can’t speak for anyone else, but I can speak for my experience, and it was a good one. You questioned the posts reporting good things about Dr. Duval and GVS. Again, I can’t speak for those folks nor do I know if their words are legitimate. I can tell you that I am currently on the west coast (with my precious dog sleeping soundly beside me as I type on my laptop) and not in cahoots with any of the other people posting here. I just happened to read the AJC online and thought I’d add my experience to the mix.
Dr. Duval returned every call I made to her. She answered every question I had and made sure I understood the procedure and the risks involved. I was comfortable with her, otherwise I would never allowed her to operate on my dog. I look at his care providers with the same critical eye I do my own. It sounds to me that yo do the same thing, as evidenced by your request for a different doctor.
I am extremely sorry for anyone who has ever lost a family member (and yes, I do consider my dog a family member.) It’s heart breaking and life changing.
Request a comment be removed
Several comments; Why can a vet practice call itself an “Animal Hospital” when in fact it is not openr 24/7? Our old vet was so greedy that he said our dog needed to be admitted and on an IV, but no-one was there after 6:00 PM until 8:00 AM the next morning. There should be a law where no business can advertise that it is an Animal Hospital unless it provides around the clock service. Second, GVS will give your animal all the healthcare you can afford. Don’t even think that they will even look at your pet until they clock your credit card for 100% of the estimated cost. After my dog was inpatient at GVS for a week (Approximately $6,000 in fees for hemolytic anemia diagnosis) they made me pay in advance before they would euthanize my pet. For that, I will never forget so yes, if they (all Vets) treat owners in a way where it is strictly a business relationship, then they should be liable for additional damages for medical malpractice on a family pet.
Request a comment be removed
If one can sue the drycleaners, why not the vet? GO FOR IT!!!
Indeed, I am an avid animal lover.
Request a comment be removed
Red Necks trying to get paid!
Request a comment be removed
Folks, the issue isn’t whether the vet can be sued. If there was negligence, there is certainly a cause of action. The issue is the amount of damages. The law, currently, doesn’t recognize the value of a normal 13 year old dog as being $75,000.00. The Suttons are just looking for a litte “green poultice (sp?)” to ease their suffering. Does anyone really think a vet who makes a mistake (assuming a mistake was made) ought to be liable for unlimited damages based on someone’s personal attachment to an animal. Why $75,000? Why not $2,000,000?
Request a comment be removed
I agree with Tim. I am a avid dog lover, but reality is….this will make the cost of vet services go up and some dogs will not get the care they need…due to the cost. 13 is a long life for a dog, and the Suttons are lucky to have had her for such a long time. They should cherish their memories, and move on.
Request a comment be removed
Does anyone know of GVP pays referral fees or a percentage of the fees it collects to vets who refer cases to it? The only way GVS will see you is via a referral from another vet. I certainly would like to know if my vet has a financial incentive to refer to GVS over other specialty clinics.
Request a comment be removed
i asked my dog to marry me and am awaiting a response. i bought a ring, made of bacon. any advice?
Request a comment be removed
Please the dog was 13 years old…….Purebread dogs are lucky to live 8-10 years. Sounds like these people just wanted their names in the AJC and a cool vaction on their dogs behalf.
Request a comment be removed
Everyone knows that there are vast numbers of dogs out there that need a home. If these people are true animal lovers then they should move on and use this as an opportunity to give a dog in need a new home.
Request a comment be removed
DATS JUST PLANE STOOPID DEM PEEPL NEEDS A GOOD WHUPPIN NOE WHUT IM SAYIN
Request a comment be removed
What is a “purebread” dog? Something to eat? I think the ignoranus meant “purebred.”
Request a comment be removed
One reason we have laws is to keep emotions from running amok. When it comes to dogs, all of us dog lovers get emotional. Michael Vick paid $1,000,000.00 to rehab his pitbulls. That was great but, has anyone thought how many more needy animals could have been cared for with that amount of money? Rehab 20 or 30 dogs or provide $500.00 worth of care to 2000 dogs?
Request a comment be removed
Are you nuts! That dog was 13 years old!! - At least 80 in human age and you are going to sue for 300,000 because you can’t eat or sleep. Get yourself another puppy. The average dog lives to be 10-15 years of age. They die, just like humans. I believe your problems stem from something else besides the loss of your dog. Adopt a loving puppy that needs your love - and there are plenty of them.
Request a comment be removed
Bury the dog and go get another one from the animal shelter or humane society.
Request a comment be removed
Ah’d tek dat dawg and jess lexicute it.
Den eet hit upP.
Request a comment be removed
purebread dogs are similar to gingerbread dogs, but purer and more glutenous.
Request a comment be removed
Sorry - I meant 75,000, not 300,000 but still that is NUTS!
Request a comment be removed
Someone stated that their pet is part of the family and that their loss is the same as losing a human member.
You’re out of your gourd. I’ve had numerous pets - have loved them all. Hated losing each and every one. If I had the choice of losing a pet or losing a child - I would not have to deliberate as you’re making it sound like. My goodness - it’s an animal - not a human being. (I know - humans are animals, too.) But, come on! $75,000 for an old dog? You’re crazy. Absolutely crazy.
I guess the fence manufacturer that made the fence for my backyard owes me $75,000 (plus interest) because my dog dug out and got hit by a car. And the people that drove the car owe me too. What about the manufacturer of the car and the car’s brakes? What about the people that sold that car?
Where does it end?? People - the justice system is not set up to become a get-rich-quick/lottery system. Suck it up. I’m sorry your dog died. So did mine. I moved on. Time for you to learn the same lesson.
Request a comment be removed
I agree with others here regarding the quality of the original article: woefully incomplete reporting, AJC! You give no details other than… “The family is mad and suing for malpractice and the vet stands by her work”. That’s it in a nutshell. Very few details other than that. How could I possible feel qualified to choose sides on this issue with so little information? Next, you clumsily tack on the issue of “Should our pets be accorded the same rights as humans with regard to medical (or in this case, veterinary) malpractice?” Then you throw this pitifully inadequate piece of reportage out there to a public more than willing to offer up their two cents worth, in spite of not having all the facts with which to make an informed judgement. I’m almost less interested in what happened to this poor animal than I am in what possessed the asleep-at-the-switch editor at the AJC to allow this incomplete story to be published in the first place.
Request a comment be removed
It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there and i’m wearing milkbone underwear.
We live in a society where everyone keeps an eye open for a get-rich-quick scheme … and i mean everyone. You can say “Oh, not me” but you would jump on board in a heartbeat for a cool 50-grande.
“Ooooh … i spilled hot coffee on me … i’m suing McDs for millions.” Wins.
“Ooooh … i’ve been smoking despite the Surgeon General’s warning and now i have lung cancer … i’m suing.” Wins,
“Ooooh … my 13 year old dog died … i’m suing.”
Gimme a break! Besides, who’s going to decide which pets are real “family pets” and deserve to fall under malpractice qualifications? I have a 150-gallon salt water tank with fish that cost several hundred dollars each. They keep me calm. If i introduce a new fish and it eats one of my others, can i sue for $75,000?
My son has an ant farm. If we feed them salmonella-tainted tomatoes from Publix and they die can we sue Publix because his ants are dead?
And with pets suddenly equal to humans, pet activists will go nuts pushing for equal rights. It’s bad enough that there are 150 handicap parking spots at the mall, but now we’ll have to pay to install air-conditioned stalls so people can leave their pets in the car while they shop.
Or they’ll push for pet-care facilities at places of employment.
Or in addition to sick days, bereavement, and maternity leave, companies will be forced to offer pet-adoption days so owners can stay home with a new pet.
When will this insanity end?!
Request a comment be removed
The article was lacking in information about why the vet was being sued. However, if the vet was negligent, the owner should be reimbursed for all medical expenses. Why should a pet owner have to pay for “bad service”? The fact that there are many more homeless animals out there (unfortunately so true) has nothing to do with this case. Either the dog was treated properly or he wasn’t. If he wasn’t, the owners should be reimbursed.
Request a comment be removed
instert Michael Vick joke here
Request a comment be removed
tomatoes were falsely accused of carrying salmonella. please don’t besmirch them. if, however, you are feeding your ants jalopeno peppers, what kind of experimental science are you practicing, man? I’m calling the authorities.
Request a comment be removed
They will recover nothing, as Georgia law limits the recovery for a pet to the fair market value of the pet- that’s it, short and sweet. I am tired of reading your headline articles about what people sue for, as it creates the impression that these people will actually recover something. Remember the nutty judge who sued his dry cleaner for a million dollars (or whatever it was) and got nothing? It’s funny how you never see the follow up stories after the bringing of these lawsuits. I guess it’s not big news to report that joe blow’s case settled for peanuts, or got dismissed by the court on summary judgment. The jury system works well, and juries don’t give away free money. These folks may be entitled to the replacement costs of a new dog, maybe not, but that’s about it. I could sue a mouse tomorrow for 3 trillion dollars……..is that news worthy? Methinks not.
Request a comment be removed
I love dogs, but this suit worries me. I live in Buckhead and it costs a fortune to treat a dog. My dog had pancreatis a couple of months ago and it cost me $1700.00.
I feel this suit will increase our veterinarian costs. Also, what did the vet do wrong. I and others I know have used Georgia Veterinary Specialists and they seem to be very competent.
However, if negligence did occur, they should sue.
Request a comment be removed
Good point, Mike. Guess that’s why we still have ants!
Request a comment be removed
What do you mean this case could elevate the status of pets. This has already happened. How is it that people feel more outrage over the life of a dog than that of a hockey player?
Request a comment be removed
Our mini-schnauzer had the same problem and our vet, Dr. Newsome at Lost Mountain Animal Hospital, and her staff worked their magic and our boy is home. He will always be watched closely to make sure he stays healthy, but they went above and beyond because they know that he isn’t just a pet, he is part of our family. Vets probably should be held accountable for wrongs that may happen - but, our vet cautioned us about the serious nature of his medical condition and kept us up-to-date daily on his status and progress. Just like you can’t / shouldn’t sue a doctor of a surgery scar bigger than you thought, you should pick your vet wisely and, if you don’t feel confident that the pet is getting the best/needed attention, then go to another vet for a second opinion.
Request a comment be removed
Wait - if pets are people too, as the saying goes - shouldn’t I be able to claim them as dependents equal to that if my children? Wow! The state and Federal governments awe me BIG TIME.
Request a comment be removed
Wild Bill, if they are fire ants, we all KNOW you’ve been feeding them jalapenos.
Request a comment be removed
I agree with others - this article does not offer either side of this story in any detail. Therefore, taking a side is difficult. However, I encourage everyone directly involved in this case to step back and look at the facts. All is not black and white.
Because I work in veterinary medicine, I see this kind of thing often. When we lose someone we love, we want someone to blame. I know how painful it is to lose a pet. However, it is important to understand that vets (or any doctors) are not miracle workers. As someone else said - medicine is not an exact science.
Dr. Julie Duval has performed procedures on my own pets and several of my friend’s pets with utmost precision, professionalism and compassion. I believe she is an excellent surgeon who would not jeopardize the life of a pet or her own reputation by giving anything less than 110%. Dr. Duval, as all board certified veterinary surgeons, has been specially trained and certified to perform far more complicated procedures than any general veterinarian should.
I do not fault these owners for taking the matter to the state board for their own peace of mind. However, the Georgia State Board of Veterinary Medicine has DISMISSED this matter. Case closed - it should go no further. Trying to sue for $75,000 is not only absurd, it is unfair. This could be the yearly salary of several employees.
Furthermore, if pets became recognized as anything other that property, the face of vet med AND pet “parenthood” would be changed for the worse:
Increase in legal monetary value of pets ->
Increased malpractice fees ->
Increased veterinary care costs ->
Decrease in proper care for pets AND increased pet insurance fees
Ultimately, it would increase pet euthanasia and/or neglect!
I love my pets like kids, but I am glad to say I OWN them and can make decisions about their care without interference. This would all change if pets were not considered property.
BTW - Phil, it is not customary for specialty practices to offer a referral fee to primary vets, in fact it is considered inappropriate. Referral practices have to work hard to earn the trust of their referring vets, these relationships can take years to build and only seconds to destroy. I am quite certain that GVS does not offer “cuts” to is referrers.
Request a comment be removed
I am so tired of these “Dog Nuts”. It is an animal, NOT A HUMAN, and NOT a part of the “Family”. I swear I beleive that some folks are having a lewd relationship (Beastiality) with those animals. The story didn’t warrant being written and taking space in the newspaper. I truely pray that the Judge (if this goes to court) Sanction the Attorney and report him/her to the Board for Review of thier liscense. I also hope the Doctor counter-sues these idiots and make them become part of the Bankrupt crowd!
Request a comment be removed
Sue for malpractice - fine. But make a dog equal to a human being? So when you let Fido run into the street and he gets hit by a car, does the driver get charged with vehicular homicide or do you get charged with neglect. Murder of people is illegal everywhere. Euthanization of animals is still legal and good luck changing that. So do these people want euthanization of people legalized? Can of worms case.
Request a comment be removed
This will make vets decline to do risky surgeries because if the animal dies, then they would be sued by the owner for “malpractice”. .. What a joke.
Request a comment be removed
Hey, gourd-head, here is a lesson for you, too: Kids die. Just like dogs. They get diseases. They get their little heads popped open by cars. Their little guts get mashed, and their crimson human blood spurts all over the street. Evil people shoot them with high-powered rifles as they step off the school bus.
This could happen to your precious little angels. And, if it does, remember that someone told you to “get over it.” You know: “move on.” Go back and just have your wife squirt another one out. now just think about that as they lower the casket into the ground.
Request a comment be removed
Pet care is expensive enough. If pet care malpractice drives up the cost of pet care, many people will hesitate taking their pets to the doctors. I do not believe that the owners motive is to prevent others from going through what they went through. The motive is pure greed, of which you and I will pay for in increased pet costs. If they were concerned about this, they would put their story out there without trying to profit from it. I lost my dog a few years ago. I was not satisfied that the vet made the right decision in the dog’s care. However, no matter how much training, doctors are still human and mistakes do happen. I am so sick of people getting rich at my expense in health care and now it may affect your pet and mine. I’m sorry,but one dog’s lose is not worth the lose of many many more pets due to people who cannot or will not take their pets to the vet due to cost of health care.
Request a comment be removed
Vets should not be exempt when their medical care harms a pet. I just don’t forsee a flood of malpractice cases if these people prevail.
No one wants the cost of vet care to go up; but at the same time giving a pass to anyone who is negligent is not a smart way to go.
Request a comment be removed
I have worked for veterinarians and I had two different vets at two different clinics kick dog that i had been holding for examination. I asked one of the vets if all vets were like that (willing to kick a helpless sick dog) and he said “pretty much”
I have agonized over those incidences for a long time and it’s the reason i gave up on wanting to become a vet tech. Yea! sue the bast*&^%
Request a comment be removed
Michael & Kathryn, I know all too well the heartache & suffering over your loss of Marshall dying a horrendous and painful death.
There are many of us, all across the US. Visit my web site:
“Pocket’s Story from NH”
http://clik.to/scotty
and also learn why Vet Boards do nothing to protect their state citizens
Request a comment be removed
We too lost a dear pet June of last year at the hands of a non-responsive uncaring Vet. Dr. Ray Rudd of Braelynn Animal Clinic in Peachtree City did what his associates called “routine” back surgery on our beagle, Holly, and she never really came out of the post surgery due to his neglect to offer proper post operative care. Instead he had us shuffle our pet within hours of surgery to an emergency clinic for weekend care at an additional expense to us of over $1600.00. We cared and followed his instructions for a week prior to having to put Holly out of her pain a week later. Our complaints to the Georgia Vet Association was investigated but we were not allowed by law to know the results. We believe some admonishment was given by the response we received but we will never know for sure. Vets are protected in such a way better than a physician. Dr. Rudds lack of concern to not even return phone calls from the clinic he had us send Holly to upset that clinic and our “home” vet to the point that our vet no longer refers patients to his practice for specialized care.
I not only feel as if a Vet should be responsible or his/her actions, but should also be subject to open records for future clients as referral. While I may not have sued over our loss, I want everyone to know the experience we had with Dr. Rudd and his non personal care when it was evident to us that he made a mistake and covered it by ridding his practice of the problem by sending us to another office when he couldnt correct his mistake.
The ability to sue would make vets more conscience of their actions and more caring towards the animal and the family.
Request a comment be removed
My wifes 2 lb chi developed a cough with hacking. I asked her if she had been giving her the wormer annually, she said no. I figured we were dealing with worms, either hook or whip. My wife took her to the vet. She had hook worms. The vet gave my wife worm medicine to rid the worms. The bill at that point would have been around 100 dollars. Not so fast. She gave her a bottle of meds for the cough, meds for congestion, and meds for a scratchy throat. She went from a dog with hook worms to a dog with 200 bucks of meds. Talk about stack a bill. Next time I will consider putting her down for half the price.
Request a comment be removed
I have been going through the same pain, grief, and agony for the last 6 months. I lost my 13-year- old canine companion to misdiagnosis and mistreatment that resulted in his agonizing death 3 days after release from the referral surgical hospital.
No amount of money will bring my pet back, but as more people file vet malpractice lawsuits along with consumers pushing for law change of the animal status, we the public will prevail. Vets will be held accountable for harming our companion animals. The vets can’t have their cake and eat it too. If they want to be comparable to human doctors (and that’s what they believe), then they should be willing to accept accountability for any voluntary or involuntary wrong-doing.
Animals are NOT PROPERTY–they are members of our families, and often times they are the son or daughter that a lot of couples are not blessed with. We spend thousands of dollars for their health care, and we are willing to do whatever the vet suggests to prolong their life or improve their health. If the plan the vet suggests fails or kills our beloved companions, then we should have every right to file a malpractice lawsuit when appropriate just as we can with any medical doctor.
Request a comment be removed
Tina Tina, what law change of animal status would you like to see? Presently people are doing jail time for neglecting animals while there are neglected children in this country. People doing jail time for participating in sports where in animals are injured while children are injured in the name of sports throughout this country every day. Some day soon your animal laws will be challenged in the U.S. Supreme court and they will explain the difference in human beings and animals to you animal worshipers. Until then enjoy your Rome, make sure you fiddle while its burning. There are places in India where they worship and feed rats while children go hungry, maybe thats your paradise? WOW!
Request a comment be removed
Wow. “D.L. Bennett” has left him or herself wide open for a defamation suit with this half-researched “article.” The article fails to mention that the pet in question died much later after an unsuccessful surgery at the hands of a much lesser veterinarian who is not a surgeon. This lawsuit is hopelessly misguided, and at the very least targets the wrong party. The writer and this publication will be lucky to avoid a serious and damaging defamation settlement for this kind of sloppy reporting.
Request a comment be removed
bTW John, you veterinary mafia goons are so easy to spot. Too bad you don’t know anything about defamation law.
This article is totally defensible. The author frames the couples charges as allegations, not fact. Space is given to the vet’s own assertions and contrary opionions. Much of the content has to do with the nature of the larger effort to elevate the status of companion animals rather than the specifics of this case.
YOU PEOPLE crack me up. You think you can scream “defamation” any time someone says something bad about a vet, and thus silence them. This only works with people who don’t know the law.
Just shows what narcissistic people you are, on a total power trip, out of touch with reality.
This paper has legal advisors no doubt, you and your mafioso have no case, stop raising your feathers and trying to scare people. We won’t let it work.
I do everything now in memory of my cat, who was given a massive insulin overdose by his veterinarian’s son — an unqualified young man with no license and no formal training, who should never have been left to care for the patients. But his dad, I guess, was saving money on “technicians” by letting his son live in the basement under the hospital in return for “cleaning cages and doing treatments” on weekends. I didn’t know this. I thought my pet was going to be cared for by qualified staff. This guy picked up a tuberculin syringe instead of an insulin syringe to give my cat his insulin. There was not even a vet on the premises supervising.
This hospital was actually — and still is — AAHA certified. AAHA - what a crock! I really believed it meant something.
This kind of thing goes on all over the place.
Request a comment be removed
Wow, vets have a mafia? I’m actually an artist, but nice try. I don’t doubt that malpractice occurs at all levels of medicine, as some of the comments on this thread attest. This article contains no information on the allegation or it’s substance or lack thereof. What is alleged? What did the vet do wrong? My issue is with this type of half-reporting. “Person X claims person Y is evil. Person Y denies this claim.” No facts whatsoever, which makes me suspicious, and will make people respond emotionally to the only fact presented: that a dog died.
Request a comment be removed
I agree with so many