Trish Wilson, who is unabashedly a cat person, has her dander up over a recent lawsuit, with good reason. A California man with a history of bipolar disorder and anxiety is suing his local library because of a scrap between his dog and its cat. He claims the spat amounts to denying him use of a public facility because of his disabilities. The case went to trial, with the plaintiff representing himself, yesterday.
I think the guy in question here is just looking for an excuse to sue the city of Escondido.
A disabled man tearfully described a library cat's attack on his assistance dog. Rik Espinosa uses the dog because he has disabilities that include major depressive and panic disorders. The cat, named L. C. for "Library Cat," has been a fixture at the library for the past eight years. The animals fought, and L. C. scratched the dog on its snout. Espinosa claims to have suffered "significant lasting, extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress including, but not limited to, terror, humiliation, shame, embarrassment, mortification, chagrin, depression, panic, anxiety, flashbacks, nightmares, loss of sleep..."
I don't doubt that Espinosa, who is unemployable, has the problems he describes. But, I don't believe observing the animals brawl caused or worsened his longterm medical condition. He already had the problems he is trying to make a causative link to based on the animals' scrap.
In the interim, Library Cat died, but Espinosa wouldn't settle the case.
He is suing for $1.5 million.
His actual damages (lost wages, trips to the vet and his own doctor) amounted to about $325.00.
The city offered him two settlements, one for $1,500, but he has refused.
Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
It is well known that cats are satanic and smother babies.
2 - Ms. Tek
I love dogs. I think that pets in SOME businesses are cool.. Business that are not dealing directly with the public.
HOWEVER, a public library is no place for a cat. Some people do have allergies to cats and dogs. Some people are scared of cats. If you are going into a public area, you should have the choice to be around animals or not. When I worked in my old place of work, we had peoples dogs in for the day from time to time. This was okay because the office was not dealing with the public. We all had a say as to if we wanted the pets there or not. A library isn't quite the same situation. Doing this was asking for a lawsuit. Where as I think that that 1.5 million dollars is an obsessive amount, I do think the case is a valid one.
Some people just are not pet people and we need to respect that. If the library wanted a cat... fine... but only after-hours to catch the rats, or mice, or whatever.
3 - Mac Diva
Vic, I agree that there are businesses where animals should not be housed or allowed to enter. My gripe with Espinosa is his misuse of disabilities law. Before I could be convinced the city has violated his rights as a handicapped person, I need to see proof that his dog does serve a medically recognized purpose. That, I believe, is the weakness in his case. (Others are that he hasn't been excluded from the library and suffered no significant damage as a result of the animals' spat.) The allegations read as if he is making up his own rules.
I also see potential problems with approved uses of animals in libraries, such as the read to the dogs programs some of them host to help children learn to read, if librarians become spooked over allowing animals in for any purpose.
Be sure to check out the entry at Mac-a-ro-nies. It is part of a column that includes a picture of Brian being hot.
4 - Trish Wilson
Thanks for the link. J. I just received word that the cat won. Espinoza lost his case.
I included in my blog post's comments a link about tasks undertaken by assitance dogs for people with psychiatric disabilities. I also updated the post to include two links about the jury's verdict. Espinoza wasn't happy that six jurors found the case 'frivolous."
Friday Cat Blogging, Part II
5 - Trish Wilson
Eric Olson wrote:
>It is well known that cats are satanic and smother babies.
LOL maybe the cats here do that. Britney looks like she would scare Satan. ;)
6 - Eric Olsen
I should add that we have both two cats and a baby.
7 - Mac Diva
I like slice-of-life stories like this because they have so many aspects to them. Espinosa, to the extent he is thinking clearly at all, relied on the sympathy factor for handicapped people. But, there is also a sympathy factor for animals that includes the library cat as well as his dog. Then there is the angle that he was asking the people on that jury, the taxpayers, to hand over their money because the cat scratched his dog on the nose. Vic brought up the argument for not allowing animals in most businesses. But, there is a countervailing one that animals serve a useful purpose in some businesses, including hospitals.
I'll be finishing an entry on the Library Cat and the Americans with Disabilities Act later today. Stay tuned for the URL. I used to host issues symposiums on Mac-a-ro-nies, but the 'that darkie is too smart for her own good' people took exception to that. Too bad. I think it was one of the better uses of having a blog.
8 - JR
I have more sympathy for animals than I do for people, but I reckon I'm anti-social.
Then again, when that mountain lion killed that woman in California a few years back, the orphaned cubs raised more money than the orphaned kids.
9 - Eric Olsen
That is terribly disturbing all the way around.
10 - JR
I think it's a sign of how well off we are in this country that we can afford to extend our sympathy to other species. I mean, nobody really believed the kids were going to starve to death, whereas the mountain lion cubs might. I'm sure most people think humans are more important than other animals, although we often have our priorities pretty mixed up.