I posted about 4 questions concerning my situtation with my ex girlfriend and my dog that she won't return. I have recently sent her a letter making an offer in exchange for the dog. I you have the time to read the details of the first 3 questions and can give me qualified legal advice, I would greatly appreciate it. I have covered all my bases with all of the other advice on here, so now all I really need is legal advice, FROM A LAWYER.... How will this play out... Is it in my favor if I go to court.. Thanks.
2006-07-04 07:48:14 · 6 answers · asked by raildog 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You have some good arguments in your favor, but you also face several hurdles in getting your dog back. The arguments in your favor are as follows: You paid for the dog. The breeder knows that you paid for the dog and hopefully is in a position to say that he recalls you coming in and buying the dog. BUT, did your ex go with you to buy the dog? Were arrangements made to buy the dog before you started dating or after? (I know that many times arrangements are made when the dog is a new born, but can't be separated from its mother til later.)
On problem you have is that you registered the dog (with AKC?) in both of your names. The problem with this is not so much the ability to prove that the dog is your "property", but rather the issue that arises is whether you intended to make this dog a gift to her. I suspect that she would argue that even if the dog was purchased by you and at that time was your property, thus giving her no rights in the dog, at all, by registering the dog in both of your names, especially if this ocurred near her birthday, or some other significant day, then she will argue that this registration shows an intent on your part to give her either the dog or an equal ownership interest in the dog.
The problem comes not so much that the dog was originally your property as it was bought by you, but your actions (the registering in both names) may signify to the Court that at the time you registered the dog your intent was to share ownership. You, of course will deny this and she will claim that your intent was to give her the dog. Arguments on your side that should be made would be to consider the cost of the dog as compared the the length of time you were dating at the time you registered the dog. This is really not the best argument to make, unless the dog was outrageously expensive and you were dating for an incredibly short period of time.
I am sorry to say, but unless she is honest about the dog not being a gift to her, your looking at a King Solomon type decision. He won't order the dog cut in two, but the Court would probably allow one of you to buy out the other's interest or direct that the dog be sold to a third person and the proceeds split. Remember that the law considers the dog to be property, and does not consider your emotional attachment. (It may consider special talents of the dog, such as a show dog or service, ie: seeing eye, dog.)
The likelihood of the dog being given outright to one of you is not great. Other things that can swing the law in your favor are other people who can testify about what your intentions were, what she really expected, etc. In this regard, your friends and her friends can come in and testify as to what you or she may have said to them. On this idea, did she have any friends within whom she is no longer friendly with? They might be in a position to help you.
Finally, you are correct in one of your earlier postings that this is not a small claims matter. You must file this type of claim in a Court with equity jurisdiction. This gives the Court the power to determine what to do with the dog.
On a personal note, and being a dog owner, please take a step back from your total hatred of your ex. Think about the dog for a moment. (I am not suggesting that the dog is better off with your ex.) What you should think about is the fact that the Court may direct that the dog be sold to a third person. Is your dog better off with a third person? Is there a third person out there, with no connection to you, who will buy this dog? If so, would that person sell the dog back to you? Are you in a position to pay for the dog again?
Please note that I am an attorney. Although I don't practice in Kansas or Missouri (I think those are the states you mentioned), the law's treatment of pets as mere chattel or property is fairly well settled. Good luck to you and good luck to your dog!
2006-07-05 02:27:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Gotta 'nother bit of info for you:
Go to the part where it talks about going through a divorce. It will at least give you info on what to do when the dog is finally given back, and hopefully he will be.
Also, I hope you sent this letter certified. That way she can't say that she never got it.
Why can't you go to small claims again? I had to go to small claims to get my cat back from my ex. Stupid, I know, but I still have her to this day and it's been 5 years. She's my bay-bee.
Good luck -- I hope you can get yourself in touch with a lawyer soon. The longer you wait, the better the chance that the dog won't remember you. :(
2006-07-04 08:09:28 · answer #2 · answered by Aussie Mommy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally, when speaking to the lawyer, it's best to speak honestly about when has occurred. All communications between a client and a lawyer are protected by client/lawyer confidentiality. That being said, admitting to a crime is completely different, and your lawyer could legally divulge that information to the police or prosecutor... however it's a very sticky situation.
2016-03-27 03:47:31 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is how it should play out. In every sense of the word the dog is property. Since you were never married there is no marital property. There can be communial property if you purchased things together. But if you have proof that you paid for the dog yourself it should be yours, unless you gave it to her as a gift.
Unless she gives you the dog you will more than likely have to file a claim to get a court order to force her to give you the dog back.
Good luck.
2006-07-04 11:58:49 · answer #4 · answered by strangedaze23 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ZO is absolutely correct, the dog has the ultimate say in the matter. The judge will ahve the dog, assuming that the dog is representing itself, what it would like to do. Other issues involve, the better caretaker doctrine and dogma.
2006-07-04 11:23:24 · answer #5 · answered by ••Mott•• 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the judge will ask the dog who he want to stay with.
2006-07-04 07:56:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋