Kansas court determines a dog is worth $1,309

KANSAS CITY, Kan. -- How much could a pet dog be worth? According to a Kansas appeals court, one Yorkshire terrier, at least, is worth about $1,300.

The case began two years ago when Sarah Burgess took her tiny terrier Murphy for a shampoo and a cut with a Kansas City, Kan. groomer. When Murphy came out limping, Burgess, an athletics director at St. Thomas Aquinas High School, got concerned.

She considered the dog family and had gotten used to having Murphy with her all the time. So when the dog was diagnosed with a dislocated hip, Burgess opted to fix it through surgery.

She also took the $1,309 veterinary bill straight back to Shampooch Pet Grooming, and told the owner her dog must have been injured there. When the groomer denied the charge, Burgess took the matter to court.

A Wyandotte County judge first ruled in her favor, ordering the groomer to pick up the tab. But Shampooch appealed, leaving the Kansas Court of Appeals to determine Friday the question of a pet's worth.

Shampooch based its appeal on the idea that any damages paid should be limited to a pet's original market value. If Burgess bought Murphy for $175, then why should a groomer have to pay the full veterinary bill for a 13-year-old dog?

"People put dollar values -- and therefore market values -- on their pets all the time," said Shampooch attorney Gerald Jeserich, according to the ruling. "... sometimes it's a specific dollar value in a want ad; sometimes people actually have their pets put to sleep because they don't want to pay the vet bills."

To which Burgess' attorney responded:

"What is the value of a wet face-licking received first thing in the morning? To a 'cat person' it is probably nothing but to a dog owner who has raised her friend from a puppy it is like the MasterCard ad -- priceless."

An aggrieved Burgess said she had pursued the lawsuit on principle, after Murphy died of cancer last year.

"It's the principle of the matter, and that's all I was going on," she said. "I wasn't suing them for pain and suffering or anything ridiculous. I just wanted whatever my vet bills were to make her whole again."

Friday's ruling may not be the end of the story. Shampooch's owner, Merlin Stice, said Friday she was considering appealing to the state Supreme Court because Murphy was not injured at her shop.

"I'm not saying Murphy was not worth anything, but I'm saying we didn't do anything (wrong)," Stice said.

Burgess' attorney, Robert Scott, said Friday's ruling was appropriate.

"You just can't put a dollar figure on something that is your life companion," Scott said.

---

Information from: The Kansas City Star, http://www.kcstar.com