We filed a small claims case against a dog breeder who knowingly sold a puppy with three congenital heart defects, saw the Pa/Nj vets (where we live) in the legal time limit, notified the seller in the legal time limit, he agreed to reimburse cost and then his wife stopped the check. We had driven to upstate NY to get puppy. He stated at that time that the puppy had a vet check which we found out from the vet it did not. It also turned out that the rest of the litter died. He stated in court this happens often and he knows it means its time to stop breeding that dog. He also stated that his dogs eat things they drag out of the woods and the pond on his property is pollluted... and also to the judge, that if we returned the puppy he would have knowing it had defects, sold it to the next person in line! Our whole case was based on the first vet check stating the puppy had a heart defect and the multiple reports from the cardiologist as she did cardiac tests in the first 9 months showing and detailing the heart defects. We submitted the vet bills as well with the reports. After waiting months for the judge's decision it arrived stating that we had not supplied a vet report, the 'form certificate' or proof the dog had serious life threatening health issues. The only thing we didn't have because no one told us we needed it, even the attorney general's office, that we needed this form. Certainly our local Pa/NJ vets would not have this form on hand or know about it. Was it the clerk's reponsibility to inform us? Did we actually need this form? She then says we did not supply the vet reports, which was basically the majority of our case paperwork... we would not have had a case in court without it. We even have the court's stamp saying it was received by them.

Do we have any recourse to rectify this case outcome? Not only did the judge have the report but we had the cardiologist on call if the judge wishes to speak to her and when we asked the judge that, she stated that she 'had all she needed in hand'... any advice or input on IF we did something wrong, or did the judge? Is there anything we can do to hold this puppy seller responsible.

we filed a small claims case against a dog breeder who knowingly sold a puppy with three congenital heart defects, saw the Pa/Nj vets (where we live) in the legal time limit, notified the seller in the legal time limit, he agreed to reimburse cost and then his wife stopped the check. We had driven to upstate NY to get puppy. He stated at that time that the puppy had a vet check which we found out from the vet it did not. It also turned out that the rest of the litter died. He stated in court this happens often and he knows it means its time to stop breeding that dog. He also stated that his dogs eat things they drag out of the woods and the pond on his property is pollluted....and also to the judge, that if we returned the puppy he would have knowing it had defects, sold it to the next person in line! Our whole case was based on the first vet check stating the puppy had a heart defect and the multiple reports from the cardiologist as she did cardiac tests in the first 9 months showing and detailing the heart defects. We submitted the vet bills as well with the reports. After waiting months for the judge's decision it arrived stating that we had not supplied a vet report, the 'form certificate' or proof the dog had serious life threatening health issues. The only thing we didnt have because no one told us we needed it, even the attorney general's office, that we needed this form. Certainly our local Pa/NJ vets would not have this form on hand or know about it. Was it the clerk's reponsibility to inform us? Did we actually need this form? She then says we did not supply the vet reports, which was basically the majority of our case paperwork...we would not have had a case in court without it. We even have the court's stamp saying it was received by them.

Do we have any recourse to rectify this case outcome? Not only did the judge have the report but we had the cardiologist on call if the judge wishes to speak to her and when we asked the judge that, she stated that she 'had all she needed in hand'...any advice or input on IF we did something wrong, or did the judge? Is there anything we can do to hold this puppy seller responsible.

First of all, I'm sorry that this person is still breeding dogs.

Second, your story doesn't make sense. You first state that you didn't supply the vet report because you weren't aware that it was necessary:

After waiting months for the judge's decision it arrived stating that we had not supplied a vet report, the 'form certificate' or proof the dog had serious life threatening health issues. The only thing we didnt have because no one told us we needed it, even the attorney general's office, that we needed this form.
But then you state that you did supply it:

She then says we did not supply the vet reports, which was basically the majority of our case paperwork...we would not have had a case in court without it.

It's very hard to give you legal advice if we don't know what the scenario is.

Did you actually submit something from a certified vet stating that a)the puppy had a life-threatening condition and b)that the seller knew about it?

It was your responsibility to ask for a copy of the initial vet bill when the seller claimed that the dog had already been checked. You neglected to do that and because the dog had not been checked, it makes it harder to prove that the seller knew the puppy was sick prior to the sale.

What exactly did you sue the seller for?

I'll join the line of confused people. You have proof that the seller knew the dog had three heart defects? What proof do you have of that?

As far as not providing proof that the dog, in fact, DID have the defects - what were you counting on to prove your case?

What did you sue for? The cost of the puppy? Medical bills?

And you say you went to NY to get the dog - puppy mill?