can full legal responsibility for an animal be transferred from apsca to a rescue group?

[Darrell]

Here is an example release form (designed to exclude from legal liability a student wishing to participate in sports at a particular university). This form apparently stands up in court. It seems to me that something similar could be written that would release the ASPCA and/or other humane societies and shelters from legal liability when a known to be aggressive animal is released to a legitimate rescue group, given that a proper and fully signed liability release document is implemented prior to said release.

http://www.eiu.edu/~gcounsel/releaseformdw.htm

Given this, I feel that laws should be passed that prevent any humane society or shelter from destroying any healthy animal deemed "aggressive" that a viable and proper rescue organization is willing to take with full liability sign-off.

NOTE: although this thread was inspired by the oreo thread, it is not intended that there be any carryover discussions pertaining to oreo in this thread. What is desired here is a discussion on whether the excuse of remaining legally liable for release of "aggressive" labeled dogs is just cause (or even valid) for euthanization of said dogs once proper liability release forms have been signed by a viable and proper rescue organization willing to take the dogs.

Understand that this is not a discussion of beliefs about what is right or wrong. Instead, it is a search for legal precedents which either affirm or deny claims of carry over legal liability following the signing of liability release forms. It is a challenge for both the members of this website and for the aspca itself to respond with facts.

[miss chiff]

hi again everybody. i was the one who originally commented on the ASPCA's liability in releasing a known aggressive to a rescue group. i am not an attorney however here's what i do know (i am a rescue group). i have no doubt that shelters are insured for liability, they would have to be. i have never met a rescue group who is. most are incorporated which means if they are sued, the principals are not personally liable in a criminal court. a civil court may be a completely different story as seen in the OJ case. i also dont believe that insurance companies would be standing in line to insure a rescue group who specialized in pit bulls because of their undesirable reputations, regardless of how predudicial. there are also issues with the DOH but im not sure how far their tenacles reach regarding the ASPCA, being a private vs. public shelter. in addition, one of the most poignant points made here were the handlers and medical. was oreo given any time of antianxiety medication until she was able to form a bond with at least one handler who didnt approach his job as though he's only making $6.50 and hour and had already become callous to the suffering. was she given a different handler frequently where she was getting mixed signals (this one is kind and gentle, the next one just drags me out of my cage without even looking in my eyes, the one after that seems kind of scared of dogs but handler must have been where the job opening was, etc....but, where is that kind, gentle one i got on the second day i was here? i trusted her but now its only gotten worse, just like with Henderson....where all of my trust and loyalty didnt work. will this escalate to abuse again for me? im so confused). the way i see it, insurance companies basically want YOU to pay them premiums every month and then when you have a health issue they immediately deny coverage in any and every way they can. insurance companies want you to pay them your money but think that's it! you just pay them and they try to do nothing or as little as possible for you. what a racket. as a matter of fact, after the last 5 years with all the flooding, insurance companies refuse to offer insurance to people living in flood risk areas! wtf is that? do they only want to insure people living in Nevada for flood insurance? people who live in deserts? insurance co.s want big money for low risk.
sorry ive gone on a tangent, hopefully you'll be able to find one or two things that apply to the question. i think that regardless of the A insisting on a release form, if the dog killed some kid, or hurt somebody and the rescue group has no money (as most dont), they would then go after the A for releasing a known aggressor and probably lose. it would also cost them lots of money better spent on prosecuting Henderson if they had to make that choice...defend themselves against a dog that killed a two year old or spend their resources prosecuting oreos abuser....there's only so much money to go around for helping animals. so unfair oreo.

[Darrell]

miss chiff:

Your point about rescues probably not having insurance coverage is well taken.

(BTW, floods do occur in deserts)

[Strega]

miss chiff-
"the principals are not personally liable in a criminal court"-
what does THAT mean?

[miss chiff]

hi strega, it means that the president, vice president, treasurer will not be at risk to lose their personal property (if they have any, most rescuers like myself havent got sh*t) in a law suit regarding the adoption org. in other words, if my kitten scratched you, youre a diabetic and werent checking your feet every day for cuts, scrapes or infection and you developed gangrene, had to have your toe amputated, you could not try to take my 16 year old car since i have no personal savings account. does that make sense at all? xoxo

[Darrell]

miss chiff:

I take it from what you've posted that your rescue group has no meaningful "business property/assets" that could be endangered by lawsuits such as buildings and/or real estate. Is that correct?

[miss chiff]

true that darrell, the most valuable thing in my world are the rescues.

[Regina Dickerson]

Please quit your bickering on discussions. They are about different opinions on animals NOT bitter arguments.

[Belles]

Regina quit trying to referee everything. You haven't posted one iota of information here - only your complaint. Nothing said in here should be upsetting to you.. unless you've been an active poster.

[bobbie]

Miss chiff, I too am in rescue and we are fully insured as well as INC. How do U get Grants with out insurance? I would like to know this as it is a new one on me . I love learning new rescue options. Thanks, bobbie

[miss chiff]

hi guys, first darrell, funny you mentioned desert flooding as while i was typing it, i knew that however, i continued with the example only because those areas of the desert are not really inhabited. the parts of the desert that are inhabited have modern drainage systems to help get rid of the flash flood waters. you comment is well taken although i think you get my point regarding insurance companies refusing to insure high risk policies.....if your child was born with spinabifita, good luck getting coverage for that preexisting condition even after the parents have paid their premiums for decades without a claim other than routine exams. a corrupt business to say the least. anyway, bobbie, to my knowledge, i am not insured for liablity on the orphaned kittens i rescue and adopt out. my contract, which the adopter and i both sign, releases me from any legal responsibility for personal injury to any human as well as unforseen medical issues. that said, my organization is a bit of an exception. we do only orphaned kitten who have been bottle raised. i am very diligent about their health and if anything unexpected crops up beyond the typical (diarrhea because they change the kits food too fast, kit gets a cold, etc.) i am there for that kitten and during the interview, i beg the adopters to call me first as i know my kits, i have bottle raised them and can almost always help. after their spay (which is included in the adoption fee thru a private vet), the kits are stable and have made themselves a new home. they do not bite or scratch as i have already taught them not to. i am available for consult for the rest of the animals life if the adopter calls me. since i do indoor only kittens and dont do dogs, it eliminates many liabilities for me. i do not have liability insurance to my knowledge. if the adoption is not working out for any reason, at any time in their lives, i stress both in the interview and in the contract that i want them back. i hope that answers your question bobbie. xoxo btw, how does insurance for rescue groups work since there are such a revolving cast of rescues? is it the business that is insured or do you have liability on each animal? im not familiar.....

[Regina Dickerson]

Belles, I'm not trying to be a referee. Where did you get that idea?? I'm trying to prevent people from getting banned. Gee whiz.

[Regina Dickerson]

I just read bits and pieces of it. Didn't make a comment with her because everyone was praises her and I didn't want to get in it.