On Wednesday, August 29 2007, Duffy dozed off while the arguments were heard Northumberland County Court PA. The argument centered around whether Duffy would face a life of leisure or be able to continue to generate income, the only way he knows.
The origins of the french bulldog are unknown but it is commonly accepted that the playful, affectionate and good natured bred was bred primarily as a companion animal and brought to France by English workers. The breed first appeared in the U S in 1896 and was first registered with the AKC in 1898.
Robertson testified that in October 2006, after finding that she was unable to give Duffy enough attention, she agreed to give him to Susan Serovich, of Kulpmont. She also stated that the agreement was on the condition that he be kept intact and available for breeding for another two or three years.
Serovich testified that she had only agreed to have Duffy bred one more time and then he would be retired. She also stated that a veterinarian had recommended having him neutered. That veterinarian, Dr Patricia Kitchen, testified by telephone and stated that she had recommended neutering Duffy after she had been informed that he would be used for breeding. She added that neutering him would also make Duffy less aggressive.
Northumberland County Judge Charles H Saylor noted that Duffy had quietly napped through the whole proceeding, only a few feet from his bench. He ruled that the women had to seek a second veterinarian's opinion on whether Duffy needs to be neutered for his own well-being. If they could not do that, he ruled that Serovich is Duffy's rightful owner and that Robinson has the right to breed him for "as long as the dog is able and it's not compromising the dog's health and comfort."
I can understand why Robinson wanted this settled legally, he is a valuable dog and she had given him with what she felt was a fair agreement. I don't understand why Serovich, who was given a valuable dog to keep as a pet, would feel she should go against what seems to be a fairly easy agreement. As for Duffy, he evidently slept through any chance of testifying about his wishes..... at least now though, it looks like he will still be able to enjoy those special "dates."
"He's a valuable breeding dog," stated Karen Robertson, of Paxinos and Duffy's original owner and breeder.Duffy, a five year-old french bulldog and known in the dog show world as Champion Rock 'n' Roll Use Your Illusion, is worth an estimated $10,000. He commands a $1,000 stud fee and his puppies sell for $3,000. Robertson stated in court that she had earned $73,000 in the three years that she had been breeding Duffy.
The origins of the french bulldog are unknown but it is commonly accepted that the playful, affectionate and good natured bred was bred primarily as a companion animal and brought to France by English workers. The breed first appeared in the U S in 1896 and was first registered with the AKC in 1898.
Robertson testified that in October 2006, after finding that she was unable to give Duffy enough attention, she agreed to give him to Susan Serovich, of Kulpmont. She also stated that the agreement was on the condition that he be kept intact and available for breeding for another two or three years.
Serovich testified that she had only agreed to have Duffy bred one more time and then he would be retired. She also stated that a veterinarian had recommended having him neutered. That veterinarian, Dr Patricia Kitchen, testified by telephone and stated that she had recommended neutering Duffy after she had been informed that he would be used for breeding. She added that neutering him would also make Duffy less aggressive.
Northumberland County Judge Charles H Saylor noted that Duffy had quietly napped through the whole proceeding, only a few feet from his bench. He ruled that the women had to seek a second veterinarian's opinion on whether Duffy needs to be neutered for his own well-being. If they could not do that, he ruled that Serovich is Duffy's rightful owner and that Robinson has the right to breed him for "as long as the dog is able and it's not compromising the dog's health and comfort."
I can understand why Robinson wanted this settled legally, he is a valuable dog and she had given him with what she felt was a fair agreement. I don't understand why Serovich, who was given a valuable dog to keep as a pet, would feel she should go against what seems to be a fairly easy agreement. As for Duffy, he evidently slept through any chance of testifying about his wishes..... at least now though, it looks like he will still be able to enjoy those special "dates."
No comments:
Post a Comment