Defective Pet Foods: New Litigation Theories Or Just the Same Old Chow? An Animal Law Attorney Argues for More Than Market Value Damages

The next-in-line Multidistrict Litigation Panel case, called something like 'In re Tainted Pet Food Litigation,' may be in the works. The facts and the human-interest stories have all the excitement and energy of one of those infrequent headline-grabbing disasters of the last few decades. In many ways, this story resembles one of those class actions, with thousands of unnamed individuals represented by lawyers seeking substantial compensation from a company or companies that allegedly ignored the potential fatal harm caused by their conduct. As usual, the offending conduct has been alleged to be something between simply negligent at best, to knowingly reckless and fraudulent at worst.

In significant ways, these cases are unique; however, even when you factor in the dog-and-cat-food angle, it is not quite a first of its kind. A class action filed against a different pet food manufacturer by plaintiffs who had alleged their companion animals had gotten sick and died from eating defendant's food was recently settled. While the scope of the problem and number of plaintiffs was smaller than in the current circumstances, the issues were more or less the same. Furthermore, there had been an intervening recall and rash of deaths caused by some pet food on the East Coast.