Article from Animal Law Source 
Lost PetsInformation and a general overview concerning the law on lost pets including the rights of the true owner, the rights and any potential liability for the finder, and the status of the pet: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/dduslostpetdisputes.htm



Common Law

  • Pets are considered property, this means that the true owner may bring an action to recover damages and possession of their pet.
  • Recovery is premised on the true owner being able to prove ownership in fact. Exceptions even if ownership in fact can be proved exist however including
    • The defendant proves that the statute of limitations has run
    • Equitable considerations override the interest of returning the pet to the true owner
    • Applicable statutes supersede the true owner’s interest



Statutes governing impoundment of stray animals

  • All states have such statutes which regulate the capture, detention, and disposal of stray animals
  • Typically stray pets taken in under these statutes will be held for several days and the shelter will attempt to locate the owner.
  • If an owner fails to claim their pet within the holding period the shelter is permitted by statute to dispose of the animal via sale, adoption, or euthanasia
  • In such cases the statute will limit liability for the shelter and its employees and give any adopter of lost pets immediate ownership rights



Lost Property Statutes

  • These may come into play to extinguish the rights of the pet’s true owner to reclaim their pet if a certain number of months have passed and the finder reported the animal as lost



The Common Law scheme in more detail

  • The characterization of the pet as abandoned or lost property is an important distinction
    • If the pet is “abandoned” property (the original owner intended to relinquish control of the property) the original owner loses all right to reclaim the pet from a finder
    • If the pet is determined to be “lost” property (owner had no intent to leave their property anywhere) the finder only has a right to keep the pet against anyone other than the original owner



Creation of a bailment upon finding a lost pet

  • When a finder take a lost pet a bailment is created, meaning they owe a duty to take all reasonable steps to care for the pet and to attempt to return it to their true owner
  • Once the true owner is found a finder is legally entitled to be compensated for any costs incurred in caring for the pet before they are obligated to return it
  • Liability for finders: Generally finders of lost property are deemed “gratuitous bailees.” The only way they may be found liable for a breach of the bailment is if they commit an intentional tort or act with gross negligence



Ways an owner may recover damages should their lost pet be harmed

  • If the pet is injured a true owner may recover by bringing traditional tort suits such as trespass and conversion so long as the required elements are established
  • Damages may include
    • The value of the animal’s replacement
    • Any income that may have been lost
    • Bills for veterinarian care
    • Very rarely an owner may be awarded punitive damages if warranted by exemplary and emotional damages



Legal options owners may use to recover their lost pets

  • Generally, under common law principles an owner can recover possession of their pet if they can prove
    • They are truly the owner of the pet
    • The pet is being detained by the finder/defendant without the legal right
  • Replevin actions are the most common means of recovering lost pets
    • Note, in certain areas an action of replevin is dictated entirely by statute rather than common law
  • Another option available is a detinue action
    • Such actions are incredibly similar to replevin actions as they are both aimed at returning property to their true ownes
    • The difference lies in the timing of change of possession
      • Replevin: the animal will return to the plaintiff at the start of legal action as a bind
      • Detinue: The possession of the animal will only change following a judgment being entered on the matter
      • Note: in some jurisdictions both actions have been joined via statute



Proving ownership of a lost pet

  • Examples of evidence that may be useful
    • Descriptions of the pet’s
      • behavior
      • appearance,
      • any marks (eg scars) that may help with identification
      • Permanent identification
    • Whether or not the pet responds to the name given to it by the original owner
    • DNA evidence matching the pet to, for example, fur/hair on a brush
    • Proof of possession of the animal for an extended period of time
  • Certain types of evidence will entitle either side with a presumption of ownership that must be rebutted by the opposing side



Wild Animals

  • If the animal is classified as “wild” the right of ownership is lost immediately following its escape without an intent to return



Defenses under Common Law

  • Should an original owner meet all the requirements to establish their cause of action the finder must offer an affirmative defense in order to maintain possession
  • Defenses include
    • The owner’s right to possession is now barred under the statute of limitations
      • Note: there is a wide variance of how long an original owner has to commence an action to recover a lost pet
      • The period of limitations may be tolled (frozen) if the finder made attempts to hide their possession of the pet



Equitable Estoppel

  • The original owner’s right to reclaim possession if it was their own actions that brought about the finder’s tortious conduct
  • Furthermore, a court may decline to return a lost pet if the original owner has unclean hands or based on a laches theory (the owner delayed bringing the action unjustifiably)
    • These situations are even more important if the finder has become very attached to the animal and its loss would cause exceptional harm



Stealing Pets

  • In certain circumstances a person taking a lost pet may incur criminal liability depending on their intent at the time of the taking
    • If a finder knows who owns the pet and fails to return it or inform the owner they may be criminally liable for theft
    • In these cases a true owner may file a report with law enforcement and request criminal charges be brought against the finder
  • Statutory provisions overriding the common law in more detail



Animal impoundment Statutes and Ordinances
The Holding Period

  • Liability may be incurred by shelters who do not hold an animal for the duration of the holding period before disposing of it
  • Furthermore, if the shelter transfers the pet to another party before the period expires the transfer will likely be held invalid
  • To determine what the holding period is look to state law, local ordinances, and contractual provisions between a shelter and the local government



Timing and the Extent of Ownership Transfer

  • Jurisdictions have split as to whether the expiration of a holding period automatically ends the ownership rights of an original owner



Disposing of lost pets following the Holding Period’s expiration

  • Shelters may be subject to liability for conversion if they dispose of lost pets in a manner inconsistent with federal, state, or local law. Doing so will also invalidate any transfer of ownership




The shelter’s standard of care for lost pets
  • A number of impoundment statutes proscribe a level care for animals that shelters must follow
  • Specifically, shelters must generally provide animals with the care needed to prevent unnecessary suffering and must comply with specific requirement laid down by statute
  • Such statutes will override general common law rules
  • Lost Property Statutes



General Scheme

  • These work to override the standard rules of common law, requiring finders to report lost property to the local government and to publish notice that they have found the property
  • In turn the owner then has a set amount of time (normally only a few months) to reclaim the property and must compensate the finder
  • If the owner does not reclaim the property within the set period of time title to the pet will transfer to the finder or the local government.
  • How such statutes apply to pets
    • Applicability is somewhat questionable, ultimately hinging on whether the category of “lost property” may be applied to pets



Specific issues

  • Are lost pets “property” as defined by the statute?
    • Certain states specify stray animals as covered under their statute
  • Applying such statutes to lost pets can be impractical due to the wording or requirements of the statute
    • Example: Connecticut’s statute requires unclaimed lost property to be sold at auction which would likely bring in little income and is a less humane option than adopted the pet out.



Issues that may arise between specific parties

  • Generally the parties in lost pet disputes can be divided into
    • The original owner
    • Private parties that interfere with or adopt the pet
    • State agencies or animal shelters
    • Veterinarians that treat, sterilize, or euthanize lost pets without the original owner’s consent
    • Third parties that either (a) harm the pet or (b) are harmed by a pet possessed by a private finder.



Original Owner vs. Private Party

  • Normally very straightforward and generally follow the previously outlined schemes
  • One unique issue: can adopters of lost pets keep their identities secret from owners seeking to reclaim their pet(s)
    • Example: owner visits a shelter looking for their pet only to find it has already been adopted, in such cases the important question as to whether the shelter must divulge the adopter’s identity is whether the information is relevant



Original Owner vs. Animal Shelter
Unique legal aspect
Veterinarians’ rights and duties
The duties and rights between a finder and third parties

  • As mentioned finders have superior ownership rights to everyone but the true owner
  • A question arises, however, as to whether finders may be held liable for damages caused by pets they find as though they were an owner
    • Jurisdictions are split on this question, regardless finders should take all reasonable steps to ensure harm does not befall others due to found pets
      • Especially with dogs and other inherently dangerous animals as strict liability is imposed for harms caused by such animals