trplnkl
555
I dont know. I would spend what I have to save my dogs. If it would result in lengthening life, and a quality life.
This is not so much about the worth of an animal, as it is about a veterinarian making a fatal error. That should be worth a little more than the cost of replacing an animal. It is a malpractice suit.
That is your prerogative to spend your money anyway you see fit. I do feel bad for the people that lose a pet they love. I do not understand the willingness to spend thousands of dollars on a pet. There are multiple reasons I do not have any pets.
T2, the suit is about the animals worth more than the mistake. The mistake is already established, the amount of the settlement is what is being challenged. It was the owners decision to spend thousands on cancer treatments (I'm sure they were given no guarantees) , should they be reimbursed because the vet made a mistake?