[link removed] [[link removed]]
image of ... [[link removed]]
John,
Have you ever looked at your pet and thought of them as family?
That’s exactly how one woman felt when she took Duke, a dog and member of their family, for a walk on what seemed like an ordinary day. Tragically, Duke was struck by a car right in front of her as they walked through a crosswalk. He died. For anyone who has loved a dog, it’s easy to understand how witnessing such a moment could cause unbearable grief. But in the eyes of the law, Duke’s life—and the pain of losing him—are viewed very differently.
In New York, emotional distress claims are only valid if someone witnesses a family member harmed in what the courts call the “zone of danger.” But under prevailing interpretation of law, pets like Duke don’t count as family members. They’re totally subsumed by their property status—no different than a chair or a car. In practical terms, this means that if someone wrongfully kills your dog (or other species of companion) then you are only entitled to recover the “market value” of the animal, which in many cases is virtually nothing. But Duke wasn’t “just a dog.” He was family.
At the Nonhuman Rights Project [[link removed]] , we fight every day to challenge an outdated and unjust legal system that treats nonhuman animals as mere “things.” That’s why we stepped in to support Duke’s case, submitting an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief [[link removed]] urging the court to recognize the truth we all know: Duke wasn’t merely a piece of property. He was an individual and loved member of the family.
This case is about so much more than Duke. It represents a wider movement to challenge outdated legal thinking and demand an evolution in our legal system to reflect what science and society already know: animals think, feel, and are an important part of our families. The law must evolve to honor their experiences, their relationships with us, and their inherent dignity and worth. The legal system’s failure to appreciate animals in this way is a failure of justice.
Amicus briefs, like the one we filed in this case, are a way for parties not directly involved in a case to share their expertise with the court. Here, our expertise fundamentally relates to our work on common law habeas corpus petitions that run into the same basic problem that Duke’s family is experiencing: the law is failing to keep up with the times when it comes to the status of nonhuman animals. We are proud to have submitted this amicus brief and will be on the lookout in 2025 to further challenge outdated and unjust legal interpretations that fail to appreciate the experience of nonhuman animals.
Please help us expand our legal advocacy for animals in 2025 by making a donation today! [[link removed]]
Every donation made this weekend will be triple matched!
DONATE TODAY [[link removed]]
[link removed] [[link removed]]
The NhRP is a nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) corporation (Tax ID #: 04-3289466). It is solely through your donations that we can continue to work for the recognition and protection of fundamental rights for nonhuman animals.
FOLLOW
[link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]]
DONATE [[link removed]]
GET YOUR NhRP GEAR AT OUR ONLINE SHOP [[link removed]]
The Nonhuman Rights Project
611 Pennsylvania Avenue SE
#345
Washington, DC 20003
United States
[email protected] [[email protected]]
Click here to unsubscribe. [[link removed]]