Peter Friedman
Lawyer
Ruling Imagination: Law and Creativity
A new breed of lawyers
As the New York Times reported two years ago, a couple in New York City rescued three pigeons in Central Park and gave them a home in their apartment for years. When the building went co-op, however, the new landlords sued to evict the couple under a city ordinance outlawing chickens, cows, “or any pigeon except Antwerp or homing pigeons.” Maddy Tarnofsky, a new breed of lawyer, came to their rescue. First, she wondered, how could the landlord prove the pet birds weren’t Antwerp or homing pigeons? He couldn’t; there is no biological difference between Antwerp pigeons or any other pigeons, and, a veterinarian testified, the birds could likely be trained to home as well. The court dismissed the eviction proceeding.
As the Times goes on to explain, the growing field of animal law is not without its critics: “Many veterinarians, for example, fear that pet lawyers could become the animal-world equivalent of medical malpractice lawyers, reaping large juryawards and contributing to a rise in malpractice insurance costs. The American Veterinary Medical Association formed a task force on animal law last year and came out squarely against redefining the legal status of pets.”
Many animal law lawyers, however, want to distinguish themselves from animal rights advocates: “they are concerned primarily with getting the legal system to acknowledge that animals have an intrinsic value beyond mere property, because of the bond between pets and their owners.”
Not that animal rights advocates are anything to fear.
ADDENDUM: As Stefani points out in the comments, Christopher Green had demonstrated in his groundbreaking study, “The Future of Veterinary Malpractice Liability” (pdf), the fears manifested in the American Veterinary Medical Association’s opposition to redefining a pet as something more than the equivalent of a chair are baseless. I’m not surprised. Playing to the public’s fears of personal injury lawyers is an old and baseless trick.