House Co-Sponsorship Memoranda

The U.S. is home to more than 110 million companion animals who reside in nearly 60% of our households. These inseparable companions form lifetime bonds and are considered family members by many of you, your relatives and your constituents.
 
Whether they spend their lives in the country or in the city, they are special class of property with a complex value not directly tied to their economic value.
 
However, Pennsylvania law provides a poor quality of Justice for their owners when companion animals are injured or killed; they treated like a lamp, a chair, or a crumpled newspaper. Damages for a companion animal owner are limited to the replacement value only, even if the person lost a cherished family pet or if veterinarian costs far exceed the economic value.
 
Our courts do not currently allow any award for a loss of companionship or emotional harm.[1] This is despite studies that show the grief response after the death of a companion animal is similar to the grief experienced upon the loss of a spouse, parent, or child.[2]
 
Due to this omission, there is also no economic disincentive to deter many from harming companion animals, such as neighbors in border disputes, jilted spouses and former partners. The news provides countless examples of companion animals being shot, thrown from buildings, poisoned, crushed, dragged to death, starved and tortured to harm an animal’s human family.
 
Similarly, with replacement value as the only standard, a person will not recover veterinarian fees in excess of the value of a companion animal. This creates a disincentive to taking socially responsible action to care for animals. This is particularly true for animals with a nominal value.
 
To provide a better quality of justice for these owners, we will be introducing a bill to:
 

1. Allow noneconomic damages for loss of companionship and emotional damages due to negligent or intentional injuries to a companion animal;
2. Define common household pets as companion animals, including dogs, cats, horses and an animal whose primary purpose is to provide comfort and companionship to the owner and is not used in business, for protection, or any other purpose; and
3. Allow veterinarian and transport fees that exceed the replacement value of an animal.

 
This would be comparable to laws in Tennessee, Illinois and North Dakota[3] and caselaw in several states. Please join us in cosponsoring this important change in the law.