These people can not be sane!!??

    • Gold Top Dog

    These people can not be sane!!??

    Denton couple demanding $206,000 from city after dog mistakenly euthanized


    10:44 PM CDT on Sunday, June 1, 2008


    By LOWELL BROWN / Denton Record-Chronicle
    lmbrown@dentonrc.com

    The Denton animal shelter is changing its procedures after a worker
    mistakenly euthanized a dog one day before its owners had arranged to
    retrieve it.

    Shawn Snider and Beth Bayless-Snider arrived to pick up their 3-year-old
    black Labrador mix on May 15 - a day earlier than planned - only to learn a
    worker had killed it that morning.

    The worker apparently didn't notice an entry on the dog's records saying the
    owners would pick it up May 16, said Lt. Lenn Carter of the Denton Police
    Department, which oversees the shelter. Lt. Carter declined to name the
    worker but said she could face discipline once an investigation is done.

    "It was definitely a mistake on our part," he said. "It's a really
    unfortunate incident, and we're going to take steps [so] that it doesn't
    happen again."

    Police Chief Roy Minter visited the owners' Denton home to apologize, but
    Mr. Snider said apologies aren't enough. He and his wife are asking the city
    for $206,000 for the loss of the dog and future breeding opportunities,
    along with "emotional pain and stress."

    They also haven't ruled out a lawsuit, he said.

    "I'm not going to just let them get away with an apology," he said. "They
    can't bring my dog back, so the only thing they can do is give me money."

    The couple filed a liability claim dated May 22 with the city's risk
    management department. City spokesman John Cabrales said officials could not
    comment on a pending claim.

    Mr. Snider said he got the dog as a puppy and named it Amicus because of its
    friendly nature. The dog fathered three litters of puppies, and the couple
    sold many of them to supplement their income, he said.

    On May 8, animal control officers picked up the dog after it escaped from
    the couple's yard. A neighbor told officers where the dog lived, Lt. Carter
    said, so officers left a notice on the door telling the owners how to redeem
    it.

    Ms. Bayless-Snider called the shelter the next day and arranged to pick up
    Amicus on May 16. They didn't get the dog sooner because they were waiting
    for payday to afford the recovery fees, which would have been $109, Mr.
    Snider said.

    By policy, the shelter holds stray dogs and cats for at least four days to
    allow owners to redeem them. If they aren't picked up, animals become
    available for adoption or euthanasia.

    When police officials learned the dog was mistakenly killed, they ceased all
    euthanasia until May 20 as part of their investigation, Lt. Carter said.

     


    THIS was a Mixed breed , they could not afford to pay $109.00 to get him out of the pound and They SUPPLEMENT thier income by selling SOME of his pups ......AAARRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH      Some days,, geez louise some days !!!!!

    I feel horrible they lost a family pet ....Why wasn't he better Contained?????????????  IF he was so special and so loved why didn't they hock thier computer, wedding rings truck what ever it took to get him out????   Nope they will waste money , that should be going to improve the quality of life for the citizes and animals of this town making them address this moronic law suit.  If the dog had been altered maybe he would not have left the yard ???? If they had spent some of that puppy money on better fencing or ??? Arrrrrggggghhhhhh I am sure the mother and all of the pups were vetted and cared for to the nth degree  before he took them to the swap meet or where ever. I know I am jumping to a lot of conclusions but Gosh Darn it I can not be the only one who spends a fortune to carefully and rarely breed, I have to save up money to have a litter .... I test, I champion, I place with the greatest of care and this moron wants $206,000.00 for ....... Why $206.000?  Why not $200.000.00 or $210.000.00  What on earth makes them or some ambulance chasing attny think a mixed breed dog with no obvious or stated claim to fame except he can escape the yard  and knock up a girl dog worth  this absurd demand??? And Pain and Suffering???   What are they doing about the pups he brought into the world that they sold or ????? 

    ARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH Thank Gosh I do not live there or I know my husband would be bailing me out of jail for causing a problem BIG TIME  Super AngryThis is so like the moron who spilled HOT   Coffee coffee on themselves yet got a ginourmous award ///what part of here is your HOT coffee  would make them think  " Hey I should drive with it between my legs ?"  I know the lid popped off... and the dog got out ...when are folks going to stand up and say THIS IS MY OWN DANG FAULT !!!!

    I need a donut and a big old caramel latte this am .... I have already burned enough calories just ranting over this idiot! Angry 

     

     Bonita of Bwana

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    Wow....   I had many of the same thoughts as you as I read through that.  I had to scroll up to the top again when I read the "lost breeding" line, as I SWORE it had said "lab mix" up there.  Yup, it did.

    Who the heck pays money for a mutt puppy?  How much money could they have possibly brought in from that?  Good lord.  Yeah, they sound responsible all right.

    I do think that the animal shelter did a HORRIBLE thing, but not $206,000 worth of horrible.

    • Gold Top Dog

     

    The article said by law the shelter holds dogs for 4 days. That would have made the dog theirs on the 12th, much before the 16th. While the shelter may have done a bad thing, they were well within their rights.
    • Bronze

    Wow, I didn't realize that shelters put animals to sleep THAT fast after getting them.  I mean it mentioned that they hold animals for four days and after that they are eligible to be put up for adoption or put down, so...

    May 8- Dog picked up and note left on owners door

    May 9- Owners call 

    May 12/May 13- Able to be adopted/put down

    May 15- Was put down

     Is it normally that fast for all shelters?  I understand that there is an increase in the need of animal shelters but that seems really fast to me.  That and they didn't even TRY to find another home for the dog.
     

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    the dog may not have been adoptable. It may have been placed up for adoption, and no one wanted it. Animal Control takes in many, many animals - and not all of them can be adopted for one reason or another. If they kept all dogs they took in, dogs would be lining the streets in crates because they would run out of room.

    • Gold Top Dog

    They planned to leave their dog in the pound for a week? has anyone checked to make sure payday was the issue and not they wanted a place to kennel him for a week?

    I am sorry the dog was PTS, but I just don't get it. I can remember what it was like to live while earning way less than the poverty level, but I think I could have found five people to loan me $20 each to get my dog back and I could have kicked in $9. This smells fishy to me. How on earth were they making money to supplement their income by breeding him? Was someone paying stud fees?

    As for how long before a dog can be PTS---when the family that originally owned my first dog brought him to the shelter they were told he had three days to be adopted because he was an owner surrender instead of a stray. (Strays have more days so they can be claimed.)  They were told that because of his size, age, energy level and behavior there was NO way he would be adopted in three days and they should realize leaving him meant he would be PTS in three days. That was in 1990. 

    PS Happy ending: Obviously they didn't leave him there.Wink I heard about him from a rescue group that had refused to take him and he lived with me for the next 12 years.

    • Gold Top Dog

    erica1989

    the dog may not have been adoptable. It may have been placed up for adoption, and no one wanted it. Animal Control takes in many, many animals - and not all of them can be adopted for one reason or another. If they kept all dogs they took in, dogs would be lining the streets in crates because they would run out of room.

     

     
    Ditto that.  Plus, if the owners are known and they do not come get their dog, many are PTS because the shelter is there for stray animals, not owner surrenders.  I know it wasn't a surrender, but that's the basis for it.  In addition, if the owner does not reclaim, and the dog is a known escape artist, the shelter may feel that euthanizing a dog like that is worth it to not have it back in again.  I'm NOT saying this is the case here just that it may be a possibility.

    And I agree Bonita.  What the  heck are these people thinking?  It makes it very scary to even begin to think about trying to start a business when someone can just sue because they want to.  I know many cases do not win, but there is a legal battle that must be fought and it costs money to fight it.  So even if you win, you are still out money.  Perhaps if we make it easy to counter-sue someone that lost a stupid lawsuit for legal expenses, then it would make people think twice about starting that lawsuit to begin with.

    I don't think it's unreasonable for the shelter to offer some monetary dispensation for such an awful mistake, but not $206,000 worth.  Heck, that may be a large percentage of their operating budget! 

    • Gold Top Dog

    If anyone wants to see the vid clip on our news...here it is...

    LINK

    • Gold Top Dog

    The confusion may have occurred over whether the dog was an owner turnin or not.  Generally OTI's are euth'ed first (well, after the obvious unadoptables).  Lynn was pulled on her euth date, just two days after being turned in by her owners.  

    I have to stop for a minute there - that just gave me shivers.  I've pulled many foster dogs on their euth date but I've never adopted one before.  I've never connected the dots emotionally with Lynn until I wrote the above.  Lynn would be dead and no one would have ever found out how wonderful she is.

    I don't blame the shelters - they are doing what they can to keep the streets from being overrun by animals bred by people exactly like this [insert something not-nice here]. 

    If I were the city, I'd countersue for the full extent of the law for having the dog running loose, and probably unlicensed, and suggest to the judge that the punishment be volunteer work at the shelter. 

    • Gold Top Dog

    Oh, that man bugs me!! 

    • Gold Top Dog

    I support him, frankly. I don't support him breeding random pups for cash, but he has that right and the city has damaged his income by *killing* his beloved pet. In the legal system, you punish people through damages, and courts give out damages based on lost income more than they do "you killed my best friend."  

    I was pretty outraged on the family's behalf before I saw the clip, and after the clip ... well, the man understands the system and wants the city to be held responsible. Good for him.

    By the way - the hot coffee lawsuit? People often think that was stupid until they learn the details of the case. McDonalds knew that they were serving their coffee at an unsafe temperature, and this was documented in company records. See this page for a quick look at the case: http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

    • Gold Top Dog

    One thing I'd point out is that the city has ADMITTED they made an error.

    Might not have been smart to do...but they admitted that someone who worked for them put in a notation NOT TO EUTH...OWNER PICK UP. It was done anyway. NOTHING else really matters here...not the owner's idiocy...the dogs breed...the city's "official policy" regardless of all that....the CITY agreed to not euthanize the dog...it was there in writing....and it was unheeded.

    THAT is the deal here...because rearrange the rest however you want...if *I* (Joe Responsible Pet Owner who had a petsitter that made an error and dog escaped, say) am out of town and call to get my dog on a certain date...and they agree and note it in the computer...I show up and my dog is DEAD? Yes...that would be a problem.

    • Gold Top Dog

    I don't know- what kind of person would knowingly leave their pet in the pound for days before picking up the dog?  $100 isn't that much, borrow and beg for it.

    • Gold Top Dog

    again...doesn't matter...the notation in the computer was there...the city admitted, on camera even, they should NOT have euthanized the dog...they owe the owner SOMETHING.

    • Gold Top Dog

    I agree with Gina.  The owners may well have a good civil case.  I don't think "guilt" of a "crime" is even an issue in civil court, so even if they hadn't admitted it, the owners can still file suit against them.  The city would be wise to settle, IMO.  The owners' comments are making them look like fools, but that does not negate the cities responsibility.  I do not think they can countersue.  Maybe collect on fines for the dog at large, or whatever happened that he ended in the pound, but at least here the policy is for the dog to be held for a certain period of time to allow for the owners to be found and collect the dog (with a big fee for re-claiming).  They can't countersue the owners above and beyond giving them the appropriate citations and fees for re-claiming the dog, if that's not how their local laws function.  So maybe they were negligent and allowed the dog to run at large, but the city suing someone for that opens the door WIDE open, which would mean if I lived there and MY dog escaped and was picked up by AC they could sue me.  Eh.

    Besides that, this thread reminds me of the one where someone hit a dog and both parties sued.  Both cases are just big, bad ACCIDENTS.  Dog should not have been at the pound, pound should not have mistakenly euthanized him.