Florida Animal Legal Questions

Unfortunately, the problem here is the collectability of the case. Without insurance you are entirely dependent on the person's ability to stroke out a check for the money claimed for your damages. Typically if this amount is more than a few thousand dollars they head to the bankruptcy lawyer which is why lawyers won't typically pursue such claims unless the defendant is hyper wealthy. The key here is to find some insurance coverage some where. ... Read More

Lets just assume the lawyer for the park is wrong. Then what? Are you willing to spend the tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees to take them to task? What is the end game? If there is none, then until this becomes an issue you need to contend with and ARE willing to invest the expense in, leave the issue be and worry about things that actually matter. ... Read More

If this is a vet malpractice case, be prepared for a lot of disappointment in retaining a lawyer absent a willingness to spend money up front on legal fees. In most every instance the damages for such cases are very low, as aminals are considered property, which makes contingent fees impractical. ... Read More

Hire a lawyer and make sure your wallter or purse is chocked full of benjamins to spend on legal fees and expenses. being a social justice warrior is never free and you will need to be prepared to spend a lot of money, if not on suing the pet shop to stop the abuse, to defend the defamation lawsuit and stalking charges that are usually leveled by such businesses against "activists." There is no middle ground... Read More

If by supporting you, you mean financially and they are willing to fully fund the litigation, then you have a viable case, at least to start. Absent an autopsy and with the cremation you may have difficult time proving she "killed" your dog. You will at least have the ability to set her for deposition and possibly other witnesses to force thier testimony under oath.... Read More

You wont likely find any lawyer specializin in such a claim for a variety or reasons, starting with they are not contingent fee cases and most people refuse to spend the legal fees to sue over the situation described.Sadly they usually opt for pro-se lawsuits only to find out thehard way as to why lawyers are anecessity in court these days. ... Read More

This is problematic case because you and your doctor are fostering the very sham that causes people with legitimate ESA/SA needs so many problems. This is clearly an attempt to abuse the ADA to allow you to have a pet where they are prohibited with a fake claim of ESA status and need. That you magically have medical need for an ESA at the same time your parents pet, may have to go to shelter, that you cared for as a pet, is magically your new ESA. Your Dr. claimning it would violate HIPAA which is not the issue is likely signaling that they will not risk thier license or being sued for fraud by backing the bogus ESA letter further. The option here is accept that they called our bluff or double down on it and spend a good bit ofmoney on a tenant lawyer to push the ADA/ESA issue to get concessions or to sue them for illegal discriminaton hoping that they will capitualte before deposing your doctor or the doctor will back the issue properly to avoid exposure. You will need to decide if its worth spending thousands of dollars right out of the gate for such an effort.... Read More

There is no common law marriage in Florida, so in theory BOTH of you are separately liable. Its unlikely that the lawyer actually sues if there is no homeowners insurance that covers the event, purely for finaincial reasons, but that also means you are on your own to defend the claim at your exoense, and need to account for the fact that they COULD file suit legally.Bottom line, defensive minimizing (ripped victims am off characterized as "small bite") is not a useful reference point for settlement negotiatons and since you have displayed that viewpoint its even more critical that you hire a lawyer to address the issue properly to at least make sure objective decisions are being made. ... Read More

Unfortunately, pet items are very diffiicfult to fund over such issues and equally difficutl to establish liability over as they are rarely intended to be infallible for dogs chewing. These cases revolve around the wlillingness of aggreived owners to spend the money to investigate and initiate lawsuits over such issues. ... Read More

Certainly - assuming its a LEGITIMATE service animal and not just "listed" as one, that is not unbridled right to have the animal on the property. There are still obligations associated with such on the part of the owners that if not met can forfeit the right. On th eother hand, a landlord that simply is trying to get rid of a legitimate service animal wrongfully opens themselves to a lawsuit under the ADA/FHA.... Read More

Suit is a potential and trying to downplay a bite event with chanting with the word "nip" that became a cut won't help. If your home owners inusrance wont cover this you will need to hire a lawyer at some expense to intervene and see if some sttlement cant be reached with a signed release. ... Read More

This is an issuewhere you use ESA and SA standards along with "animal" and not dog which can be an issue. A LEGITIMATE medically documents SA or ESA is not a pet and can afford you some remedies under the ADA or FHA regulations. If you were charged a pet fee you could hire a lawyer to sue for return of the money and damages along with legal fees. The key is legitimate SA or ESA as there is a huge tremd of tenants using online quack doctors to have the pit bulls declared ESA's or SA's and then when the litigation starts the ruse is exposed. You want to make sure you have the proper medical back up on such cases. ... Read More

This is an issue about the terms of the "giving" the cat away. There is no "legal help" that will address such an issue absent some personal favor from a lawyer you know or the like. This sounds like there is more to this story from the other person that may also affect who did what to whom or for whom. ... Read More