Goldblatt Class Action pet vaccine Law suit

[malernee]

Class Action Law suit




You may be a party to a potential class action lawsuit arising from the misrepresentation of the need for vaccinations for your pets.


If, within the last four years, you have paid for any of the following pet vaccinations without receiving adequate disclosure, you may have a claim for damages. The vaccines include the following:

1) Annual vaccination for canine distemper, parvovirus, and feline distemper, rhinotracheitis, calcivirus
(Scientific studies indicate that repeat administration of these vaccines provides no beneficial effect.) 2) Corona virus vaccination.
(Scientific studies indicate dogs over 8 weeks old are not susceptible to this disease.)
3) Leptospirosis or Lyme disease vaccination
(Research indicates these diseases are rare to non-existent in Texas and many other parts of the country.)
4) Feline Aids vaccine, Feline Infectious Peritonitis vaccine, or Giardia vaccine
(Scientific studies have shown these vaccines to be ineffective.)

if you have paid for any of the above vaccinations in the last four years and would like information concerning your rights, please send an email to:

Roy R. Brandys or John Sawin

Childress Duffy Goldblatt, Ltd.

petvaccine@childresslaw.net

Se Habla Espanol

[guest]

Critter Fixer Pet Hospital

Bob Rogers DVM



5703 Louetta Spring, Texas 77379





Dear Pet Owner,



The Law Firm of Childress Duffy Goldblatt, Ltd. of Chicago, Illinois, has
agreed to investigate and pursue a potential class action lawsuit arising from
the misrepresentation of the need for pet vaccinations. If you have paid for
pet vaccinations in the last four years without adequate disclosures, please
email the Firm at petvaccine@childresslaw.net.



Every year over 30 thousand dogs and cats in the U.S. die from adverse
reactions from unnecessary vaccines. It has been ten years since the article
first appeared in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
entitled “Are we Vaccinating too much?” in which and Dr Ron Schultz stated, ”
Clients are paying for something with no effect except the risk of an adverse
reaction”.



Since that time the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American
Association of Feline Practitioners, and the American Animal Hospital
Association as well as twenty- two schools of Veterinary Medicine in the U.S. have
endorsed reductions in the numbers and frequency of vaccinations recommended for
pets. More and more research has confirmed that most vaccines are
unnecessary and potentially harmful. And yet 90% of the Veterinarians in the United
States have ignored these guidelines, and continue to give vaccines, which have
been proven to be unnecessary and potentially harmful.



My efforts in the last six years to promote change have been met with
frustration. I have written to every State Board of Veterinary Medicine in the
U.S. I have been before the Texas State Board six times. After I appeared before
the Texas Sunset Committee, a group of 12 Senators who over- see the State
Veterinary Board, they ordered the Board to crack down on unnecessary
vaccines. They have not. The Attorney General’s office in Texas has agreed that it is
unlawful for a Veterinarian to obtain a fee by the misrepresentation of the
benefit or necessity of vaccines. And yet the misrepresentation of vaccines
to the public and the harming of our pets continues unchecked.



We need your help. I feel that a class action lawsuit is the only way pet
owners can get fair and ethical treatment for our loved ones.



Sincerely,







Dr. Bob Rogers







I appreciate all the help in getting the word out about this class action suit. Please spread the word any way you can. There are however some things I need to clarify.

#1. If you have not already contacted the press it will be better to wait two weeks to do so. I will be on vacation until May 23 and the press may not be wailing to wait and might publish only what our opponents want to say.

#2 My role in this is, as the president of a non profit making organization, Critter Advocacy, I have received e mails from over 300 people whose pets have been harmed by vaccinations. I am making people aware of this option to resolve their issues, and prevent this from happening to others.

#3 I did not approach this law firm or initiate this suit. I have, for the last year provided them with scientific literature. They came to me and requested my assistance.

#4 I am not being paid by this law firm. I am not a plaintiff in this suit. I will have no financial gain from this law suit.

[guest]

[Guest]

QUOTE:
See:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertain ... &cset=true

QUOTE:
Posted on Wed, Jun. 29, 2005

Growing trend of pet law gives animals their day in court

BY WILLIAM HAGEMAN
Chicago Tribune

(KRT) - The veterinarian botches routine surgery, and now the family cat
resembles something out of Stephen King's "Pet Sematary." Or that "miniature
poodle" puppy you got from a breeder has grown to 90 pounds and looks more like a
dingo-bulldog mix.

Pet owners traditionally had little legal recourse in situations such as
these. In every court system, animals have been considered property. But animal
advocates and attorneys along with their clients are making headway in getting
the legal system to recognize what society increasingly believes:

Animals are more than just property. They're like family.

Today, people are seeking out lawyers like Chicago's Amy Breyer who
specialize in the growing field of animal law and will pursue cases such as
veterinarian malpractice, animal abuse or landlord-tenant issues with as much
aggressiveness and skill as any other type of legal claim. And as the animal law
landscape grows, so do questions about where it's headed and what pet owners can or
should do.

"It's a big, complex issue. It's not cut and dried," said Sharon Granskog,
spokeswoman for the American Veterinary Medical Association, which represents
more than 72,000 veterinarians.

Animal law encompasses a broad range of topics. It can cover companion
animals, farm animals, research animals and wildlife, and civil as well as criminal
cases. The key to the growth of the field is that judges and juries have begun
to look at animals as companions or family members. And that's a big change.
But is it a good one?

These kinds of cases have probably been around, though under the radar, for a
long time, said Breyer, who graduated from Northwestern University in 2000
and opened the first animal law practice in Illinois.

"But ... it was the kind of case where it was your neighbor or friend and
you'd just see what would happen. You'd file it in small claims and if it got
dismissed everybody just went away," she said.

It's a new ballgame today. There once was a time when opposing attorneys
would bark at Steve Wise in the courtroom.

Wise has been working in the field for 25 years. He's an attorney, and author
("Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals"). He has taught at the
Vermont Law School, Harvard Law School and the John Marshall Law School.

"When I began doing animal-protection law in 1980, there were just a handful
of lawyers around the United States who took any of these cases or took them
seriously," he said. "Hardly any judges had seen the issue or dealt with it
seriously."

That's because of attorneys such as Breyer. In her practice, she handles
pet-related cruelty claims, condo zoning issues, contractual disputes, consumer
fraud and veterinary malpractice lawsuits.

One of the malpractice suits is a pending case involving a Lab-shepherd mix
named Missy.

About three years ago, Jim and Kristin Noyes, then living in St. Charles,
Ill., adopted Missy from a South Elgin shelter where they volunteered. She was
about 8 at the time and had been at the shelter for six months. Not only was her
age working against her, but Missy also had bad knees on both rear legs.

The Noyeses adopted her and chose to have a patented surgical procedure
performed. It's called tibial plateau leveling osteotomy and is done by
veterinarians certified in the method. They chose one such vet for the surgery. But the
results weren't as promised - the lawsuit claims the veterinarian failed to
follow the prescribed procedures - and after numerous follow-up surgeries,
Missy's left rear leg had to be amputated by another surgeon.

"I've been involved my entire adult life with lots of animal-rights
organizations that I've worked with, I've supported," Jim Noyes said. "But until this
came up I'd never really thought of the topic of animal law and what it
entailed. But I was put into a position where it came to the forefront very quickly."

The suit seeks in excess of $50,000 in damages. That's a lot of money for a
shelter dog. But in the expanding landscape of animal law, where companionship
counts, it isn't unheard of.

"I think now there has been this steady drumbeat of suits around the country
where lawyers are beginning to try to sensitize judges to the fact that
veterinary malpractice cases are really serious," Wise said, "and that they actually
deal with people's companion animals. And companion animals are frequently
seen as family members."

That may be a stretch, and a dangerous one, said the AVMA's Granskog, because
it leads to a discussion of pet ownership versus guardianship.

"Is an owner not an owner but a guardian? And when you get into that, you
start getting into that legal definition of what a guardian is, and then you get
into (a situation in which) you may not be able to make health-care decisions
for your animal. You may be required by law to have certain surgeries, or
certain things, because that has been determined to be the best thing for the
animal."

Terminology aside, there also is the question of whether an increase in
malpractice cases would lead to higher malpractice insurance premiums, and thus
higher vet bills. Right now premiums are low - typically a couple of hundred
dollars a year - and similarly, the amounts paid out in malpractice cases have
been relatively small. The largest damage award in a vet malpractice case is
$39,000, handed down last year in Orange County, Calif.

But, as Wise said, the monetary damages aren't always the most important
aspect of a case.

"I'm a business and entertainment litigator, but I have a passion for
animal-protection issues," said Terri Macellaro, who was the plaintiff's attorney in
the Orange County case. "I took the case because it was an opportunity to try
to get the law to catch up to where it should be. And I think we accomplished
that, at least in part."

After finding the vet guilty of malpractice, the jury decided that although
the dog was a rescued dog with a market value of only $10, there was a unique
value of the animal to its owner. The jury put that amount at $30,000. The
additional $9,000 was for the owner's vet bills.

"Part of the problem before was that it was believed that animals had a
market value of whatever somebody paid for them," Marcellaro said. "And now the law
is starting to recognize that's not the case. So the law can call a dog a
piece of property all it wants, but at least there's a recognition that it's a
very valuable piece of property that cannot be replaced by simply going out and b
uying another dog."

Veterinarian Denise M. Lindley said that in her 17 years in the profession,
she has had fewer than 10 cases turned over to her insurance company. And she
prevailed in every one. So the system has worked for her. But she doesn't like
what she sees in the expansion of animal law.

"It's bothersome to me," she said. "It's a frontier that lawyers probably
think they can exploit. But, you know, why is a lawyer going after a $39,000 case
when they can do kabillion-dollar cases in the state of Mississippi for
cigarettes? I don't understand that."

She isn't just pointing a finger at lawyers; pet owners are part of the
problem, she said. They'll buy a dog from a pet shop or sign a contract with a
breeder without being fully informed.

But until something is hammered out, and as the field of animal law evolves,
the courts, lawyers, vets and pet owners will have to feel their way.

"It's very new," Breyer said, "and so I think society as a whole is not used
to necessarily having these things resolved. There's a learning curve."

---
ANIMAL CASES

Here's a sampling of some of the larger monetary awards in recent
animal-related cases:

_$135,000 for the poisoning of two dogs in Oregon.

_$126,000 for the intentional destruction of two pet horses in Kentucky.

_$45,000 for the death of a cat, killed by a neighbor's dog, in Washington
state.

_$39,000 for veterinary malpractice in the death of a dog in California.
---

© 2005, Chicago Tribune.