No emotional distress claim for witnessing death of pet: NJ Supreme court

The New Jersey Supreme Court has refused to expand its landmark emotional distress precedent to include emotional distress damages for witnessing the death of a pet.  In McDougall v. Lamm the court - 5-0 - held:

[W]e do not question plaintiff's argument that, for many people, their pets are not merely property. That alone, however, cannot support a cause of action for emotional distress damages. Instead, that value is recognized through the precedents that permit the measure of recovery for the loss of the pet to exceed its replacement value and to include the intrinsic value of the pet. Plaintiff's [$5,000] damage award in this matter, as an illustration, appropriately exceeded even the highest cost that she estimated would be needed to replace the dog with another one.

McDougall was walking her dog when a large dog belonging to defendant Lamm ran out, grabbed plaintiff's dog by the neck, and picked it up and shook it several times before dropping it, causing the death of plaintiff's dog. Plaintiff alleged that defendant was negligent in maintaining her dog and demanded compensatory damages. McDougall also alleged that, as a result of witnessing the dog's death, she suffered significant emotional distress for which she demanded damages. The trial court dismissed the emotional-distress claim, observing that the law categorizes dogs as a form of personal property and there is no cause of action in New Jersey that permits an emotional-distress claim based on property loss.