This came to me via lexisONE(R). I believe Going To The Dogs appeared orginally in The Boston Globe. Maybe I am too far from the East Coast or from the cutting edge of divorce law, or maybe I do not attract clients who want to pay the money for a fight over their pets. (Actually, I am trying to think of the last client I had who had any pets and am coming up empty. Maybe the difference between Boston and Indiana is the client's attitudes towards their pets.)
"A decade ago, the idea that a divorce would involve 'custody' of a pet, much less that the decision would factor in the pet's own predilections, would have been dismissed by most lawyers as absurd. Pets were property, and not very valuable property at that, to be balanced against all of the other stuff that is split up in a divorce - nobody, after all, talks about joint custody of an armoire."
An interesting story, nonetheless.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment