September 23, 2017, 11:27:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: flag          flag
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot Ask Co.mments Feed Me Links Google Bookmarks MSN Live Netscape Socializer Squidoo Technorati Yahoo My Web

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lawsuit Involving Natural Balance  (Read 1351 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
LoveNewfies
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11709



WWW
« on: September 17, 2007, 12:53:52 PM »

I'm only posting part of this as it's from a subscription only site but I found this rather ineresting, maybe disturbing is a bit more appropriate, primarily the response from the president of Natural Balance.  Don't get me wrong, I'm aware of the law and of the fact that no corporation wants to pay out if they don't HAVE to, but, I wouldn't expect what is in bold below from Natural Balance

The biological technology company targeted by the suit shipped contaminated rice protein into San Francisco. The protein went into some Natural Balance Pet Food products, which is named in the lawsuit and was among many brands tainted with melamine.

Surprised to be named in the suit, Natural Balance president Joey Herrick said his company has paid all claims of people whose pets died or were sickened by the tainted food.  According to Herrick, Natural Balance has paid more than US$100,000 to nearly 200 pet owners, including vet bills and in some cases, the cost to replace an animal. In one case, he said, US$14,000 was paid to a pet owner to cover veterinary care that eventually saved the animal's life. Paying for mental anguish is where Herrick draws the line. According to Richard Buxbaum, UC Berkley law professor, it would be unprecedented for courts to award money for grief over losing a pet.
Logged

minniesmom
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 50697


*The Enabler*


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2007, 01:03:45 PM »

That is wrong.
Logged

 
KivaLuver
Dog Addict!
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14478



« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2007, 08:16:39 PM »

I'm not sure, but I think that is the general held by the courts all over the country. I don't agree with it. Maybe some day the tide of opinio will change.
Logged

Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened.-Antone France
Animals share with us the privilege of having a soul.-Pythagoras
Hill
May Bite...
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6980



« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2007, 09:44:32 PM »

The only problem is I don't want some idiot to say his dog mentally anguished him to the point where he could never work again and needed 10,000,000 dollars to cover himself... And then if I use that product which I did for a long time for Oz when he wouldn't eat ANYTHING else I'm paying for some frivolous lawsuit...

You have to draw that line in the sand somewhere or the sue happy american nation where everything is guaranteed and everyone is entitled to something for nothing will trample all over you!
Logged

Life is sweeter with a six pack!

LoveNewfies
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11709



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2007, 08:46:27 AM »

No, no - I don't disagree with drawing a line - and it is pretty well general for courts to hold to that across the country.  I just think by him openly making that statement makes NB look callous and uncaring - I would think his PR people could have come up with a way to not sound so harsh about it. 
Logged

KivaLuver
Dog Addict!
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14478



« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2007, 10:50:46 AM »

I think there should be something for pain and suffering but nothing wacky. Since most criminal penalties for animal abuse/etc are two lax, IMO, if people could face a civil suite too then more of them might think twice about their actions.
Logged

Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened.-Antone France
Animals share with us the privilege of having a soul.-Pythagoras
A.J.
Staff Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16770



« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2007, 02:52:04 PM »

I agree.....I don't think someone should be paid lots of money either, but we all know here, how grief stricken we would be, to lose our precious babies!  Sad

modified to say: I don't think some nut out there should be paid lots of money....
« Last Edit: September 18, 2007, 03:09:52 PM by A.J. » Logged


God, help me to be the kind of person that my dog thinks I am."
www.shoptoearn.net/aj12
Hill
May Bite...
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6980



« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2007, 09:26:45 AM »

I think it stems from me enjoying the blunt side of things! You really gotta hit me over the head with subtlety huh?

I can also look at this a different way. There is EVERY chance that had Aurora been vaccinated with a different dapp vaccination she wouldn't have been susceptible to Distemper. After she died my whole life changed. My whole outlook and the way I feel and act changed. Everyone around me noticed it. And there were days when I really thought hey If I could just die today that would be great. It took a LONG time to pull myself out of that depression and I do still cry most of the time wen I think or talk about her. I could sue that vaccine company, I could sue the vet on charges that they didn't store it or handle it properly. BUT there was another component the dog itself. And the immune system and the ability to fight things like this off. She didn't have it. And maybe some of these dogs that passed also didn't have it or the owners didn't notice symptoms in time, or they were unwilling to fight for their pet. Because a LOT of affected pets did live. We saw probably 8-10 pets affected and with fluids and proper managment and owners who were willing to try to save them they made it. We only lost one and it probably would have lived if the owners had just let us do what we needed to.

This whole thing just strikes me as a slippery slope issue. Once you pay out a claim of 1000$ the nxt one is 2000$ and the next 4000$ where does it end an what kind of price can you put on the unconditional love and friendship and companionship these little (or big) ones provide to us. You can't put a price tag on a family member.

But I suppose when you boil it all down and step back and read that article he's got a crappy Pr person working for him my 4 year old twin neice and nephew could have phrased that sentence 100X better ! rotfl

Sorry thats so long I must be feeling wordy today and a touch sad because the third year of Auroras passing is upon me in 3 days.
Logged

Life is sweeter with a six pack!

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Questions? Comments? Contact the Webmaster
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.039 seconds with 37 queries.

Google visited last this page June 08, 2017, 12:14:18 AM