Veterinarian Issues
Displaying 211 - 220 of 247
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| State v. Avella | The Defendant was charged with practicing veterinary medicine without a license and for cruelty to animals. The Defendant made a homemade device attempting to treat his dog for a problem because he did not have the money to take his dog to the vet. The home treatment ended up injuring the dog and he took the dog to a veterinarian for treatment. The veterinarian stated that the dog needed to be taken to an advanced care veterinary facility, however, the Defendant could not do so due to lack of funds. The trial court dismissed the charges brought against the Defendant and the State of Florida appealed. Florida law forbids a person from practicing veterinary medicine without a license. The Defendant was not a veterinarian. The Defendant relied upon statutory exemptions in Florida’s statue that permit a person to care for his or her own animals and claims that he was just trying to help his dog, Thor. The Defendant also argued that the purpose of the statute was to prevent unlicensed veterinary care provided to the public rather than to criminalize the care an owner provides to his or her animals. The Court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing Count I for unlicensed practice of veterinary medicine given the stated purpose of the statute and the statutory exemptions. As for Count II, animal cruelty, the State argued that the Defendant’s conduct in using a homemade tool to remove bone fragments from the dog’s rectum and then failing to take the dog to an advanced care clinic fits under the Florida animal cruelty statute. Although the Defendant argued that he had no intention of inflicting pain upon his dog and was only trying to help him, the Court agreed with the State’s argument that “the statute does not require a specific intent to cause pain but punishes an intentional act that results in the excessive infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering.” Ultimately the Court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of Count I, reversed the trial court’s dismissal of Count II and remanded for further proceedings on the animal cruelty charge. |
| Stephanski v. Wimpy | Complaint against a vet. for malpractice. Plaintiff's dog died after it was neutered. Plaintiff sought non-economic damages. |
| Table of Veterinary Lien Laws | This comparative table explores veterinary and possessory lien laws. A lien is a right in property to secure payment on a debt. Since animals are considered the personal property of their owners, they can be the subject of liens. Many states have laws on liens for animal care. These range from boarding liens to veterinary liens. |
| Table of Veterinary Reporting Requirement and Immunity Laws | |
| The Future of Veterinary Malpractice Liability in the Care of Companion Animals | |
| TN - Disaster - Part 8. Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act of 2007 | The Tennessee Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act applies to registered volunteer health practitioners who provide health services for a host entity during an emergency. Volunteer health practitioners are not liable for their acts or omissions in providing health services. Health services means treatment, care, advice, guidance, or provision of supplies related to the health or death of an animal or to animal populations. |
| TN - Expert - § 29-26-115. Burden of proof; expert witnesses | This Tennessee statute provides the requirements for the claimant's burden of proof under malpractice actions, including, inter alia, the proof that the defendant's actions fell below the recognized standard of acceptable professional practice in the community, proximate cause, and proof by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant's actions were negligent. |
| TN - Liens, Veterinary - § 63-12-134. Liens and incumbrances. | This statute specifically allow vets to hold an animal until a bill is paid for treatment, board or care of an animal. |
| TN - Veterinary - Chapter 12. Veterinarians. | These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners. |
| Turner v. Benhart |
|