However, many judges in multiple jurisdictions will consider written legal arrangements, such as a prenuptial agreement or partition agreement, when considering the issue of pet custody. Therefore, if you are concerned about keeping pets, it is in your best interest to agree beforehand or in a separation agreement (if possible) to avoid a lengthy and costly dispute. Ultimately, if you and your spouse can draft an agreement and stick to it, it`s very likely that the court will honor that agreement. You may be thinking, “This list is very similar to the factors a judge considers in a custody dispute.” You are right. Because pets become such an important part of many people`s lives, some courts are changing the way they analyze custody disputes and use factors similar to custody disputes when deciding custody. Pet sitting refers to problems that arise when more than one person claims ownership of a dog, cat, or other small animal. Pet custody issues sometimes lead to a dispute over ownership and custody. However, it`s worth noting that some Colorado judges put more emphasis on choosing the owner who can offer the pet the best possible life, while others continue to care about who has legal ownership of the animal. A pet advocate is your best source of industry knowledge about how judges in your area typically approach pet ownership issues. Then, together, you can gather the most convincing evidence to help you get custody of the animal.
If you find yourself in a situation where you have broken up with someone and are struggling with pet sitting issues with no custody regulations in sight, you should definitely consult an experienced and well-qualified lawyer. Every lawyer in the family has a history of fighting for the family dog (for some reason, it always seems to be dogs; Cats are not respected). We hate pet sitting cases. And family law lawyers who love animals hate them even more. Animals are considered family members, so if a family splits, how are pets treated? What are the pet custody laws in Pennsylvania? These animals were then adopted by well-meaning and generous families. However, as affected families recovered from the disaster, many attempted to regain custody of their pets, resulting in numerous custody disputes. Ken joined LegalMatch in January 2002. Since his arrival, Ken has worked with a wide range of talented lawyers, paralegals and law students to make LegalMatch`s law library a comprehensive source of legal information accessible to all.
Prior to joining LegalMatch, Ken practiced law for four years in San Francisco, California, where he handled a wide range of cases in areas as diverse as family law (divorce, custody and support, restraining orders, paternity), real estate (real estate, landlord/tenant litigation for residential and commercial properties), criminal law (felonies, felonies, minors, traffic violations), assault (car accidents, medical malpractice, slips and falls), entertainment (registration contracts, copyright and trademark registration, licensing agreements), labor law (wage claims, discrimination, sexual harassment), commercial law and contracts (breach of contract, contract design) and San Francisco bankruptcy (Chapter 7 Bankruptcies personal). Ken holds a J.D. Golden Gate University School of Law and a B.S. in Business Administration from Pepperdine University. He is admitted to practice law at the California State Bar and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Ken is an active member of the American Bar Association, the San Francisco Bar Association, and California Lawyers for the Arts. The imperfect state of the law can lead to extreme measures taken by one or both spouses. Some couples spend exorbitant amounts of money to combat the problem of homeownership.
In one exhibit, a San Diego divorcee spent more than two years arguing over custody of the couple`s dog, “Gigi.” Among other things, she hired an expert in animal behavior, commissioned a study on “dog binding,” and created a video documenting a day in Gigi`s life. Although she ultimately won the case, her bills would amount to more than $140,000 at the end of the trial. “Woof, woof, we divorce”: pet custody and the law. The article, after reviewing various cases (none of them from Massachusetts), concludes that a judge might be inclined to award custody (i.e., property) based on what is in the best interest of the animal (as if it were a child), or might choose on a more egregious property criterion as simple as who wrote the check for each animal. A court can maintain an access agreement between two parties, but cannot issue its own access order. In at least one case where this was attempted, the ongoing conflict between the people led an appeals court to terminate the visit. Battles between family and pet custody are on the rise. While they reflect a pet`s important role in the family, they have also added conflict to an often already stressful situation.
If you are involved in a custody case involving a pet, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, which has ranked California #3 in the country for its animal welfare laws, can provide an amicus curia letter. Although most courts award custody based on the person designated as the rightful owner of the animal, this is not always the case. In 2017, Alaska became the first state to pass a law requiring courts to consider the pet`s interests in pet keeping cases. Illinois became the second in 2018. At the national level, pet custody laws are evolving. More and more tribunals are basing their decisions beyond purely monetary factors and incorporating a more custodial approach. Factors such as animal welfare and the role of the primary caregiver are more often considered when judges make these types of decisions. Pennsylvania courts have yet to share this view, but if this national trend continues, there could be hope for future pet keeping cases.