How to Deal with Pets in a Divorce Situation
Sep 20, 2024 | Written by: | Share
In New Jersey, for purposes of a divorce, pets are considered by the courts to be chattel or goods, owned as property rather than treated like children with custody issues. However, most pet owners feel differently, and in many divorce cases the parties address the issue of pets similarly to the way they address custody and parenting time of children.
In some cases, there is no dispute over who will keep the family pet(s). However, there are cases where the custody of pets is a significant dispute and can become a major issue in the case. In some divorces where the parties do not have children but have pets, the parties are even more attached to the pets than an average pet owner. In those cases, there may be a resolution where both parties get to spend time with the pets after the divorce. If there is more than one pet, and the pets are attached to each other, typically the parties would not want to split them up.
I had a case many years ago where the parties did not have children but had two dogs, and both parties were very attached to the dogs. We had an arbitration rather than a trial, but the custody of the pets was a big issue. We had testimony from both of the parties, as well as the dogs’ vet and the dogs’ groomer. Part of the parties’ testimony included reviewing pictures of the dogs throughout the years. Ultimately the case settled, including custody of the dogs, but this case demonstrated to me how pets could be a significant disputed issue in a divorce case.
If the analysis for pets was similar to custody of children, the overriding principle would be the pet’s best interest. Can the divorcing parties utilize some of the child custody factors under the Statute N.J.S.A. 9:2-4? This raises a myriad of questions, such as how does one determine the pet’s best interest? Is it in the pet’s best interest to be with the party who spoils the pet with the most treats, or does that potentially make the pet unhealthy? Is the pet better off with the party who takes the pet for the most walks, or the one who pays for the pet’s vet bills?
This issue makes me envision a scenario where a dog is in the courtroom, and the judge has each party stand apart and call the dog to see who the dog runs to... However, that is more like a Brady Bunch episode than real life.
It is clear how pet custody would be a difficult issue to determine if the analysis were the same as it is for children (just like it is difficult to decide custody for children). Therefore, the general guideline is that pets purchased by one party prior to the marriage are considered to be owned by that party, and are not a marital asset or part of the divorce. However, pets purchased during the marriage are a marital asset.
If the parties cannot agree on who should have custody of a pet, it may be best to have some form of custody sharing. When there are children involved, sometimes the parties will reach an agreement where the pets travel back and forth with the children to each parties’ home. Even when children are not involved, the sharing of pets is possible post-divorce.
Although custody of pets is not the most common issue in divorces, it can be a big issue when it does occasionally come up. Anyone who is attached to a pet can certainly understand why custody of the pet can be a considerable issue. And like all issues in divorce cases, it is always better to reach an agreement rather than litigate the issue. Using an alternative dispute resolution process such as mediation can help bring a creative solution to a pet custody issue post-divorce.
William J. Rudnik, Esq., is a partner with Gebhardt & Kiefer, PC. He is certified by the NJ Supreme Court as a Matrimonial Law Attorney. In addition to handling divorce litigation, he is qualified as a Mediator in the field of Family Law under the New Jersey Court rules, and he is trained in Collaborative Divorce. Contact Mr. Rudnik at 908-735-5161 or via email.
If you have a suggestion for a future blog topic, please feel free to submit it via the Contact Us form.
Any statements made herein are solely for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon or construed as legal advice.