Last week I helped a friend with her small claims appeal. Even though they call it an “appeal,” a small claims appeal is really a rehearing. At the initial hearing, she lost and owed the plaintiff almost $6,000. I thought the law was in her favor and knew if it could be carefully explained to the judge, she would win. I also knew that I was more experienced at making those arguments, so I volunteered to represent her. We won and she was very happy. I have worked on cases involving many millions of dollars, but I worked on this $6,000 claim as if the same amount was at issue. To my client, that was a substantial amount of money and I really wanted to help her. When the judge ruled in her favor, I felt relieved and happy that I could remove the burden of this judgment off her shoulders. Those are the times when I feel satisfied in helping people.
Several years ago I won an appeal, Plotnik v. Meihaus. In that case, the Court of Appeal confirmed the right of a pet owner to sue for emotional distress when another person intentionally harms or kills a pet. It was a very gratifying win for me and I received more publicity and letters on that case than on any other case in my entire career. Well, my 15 minutes of fame was over, or so I thought. I recently received an e-mail from retired attorney Sandy Toye, who previously specialized in handling animal-related matters. She wrote:
“A friend of mine recently informed me of Plotnik v. Meihaus. I just wanted to thank you for accomplishing something I spent my entire professional career trying to accomplish . . . It means so much to all animal lovers and to me personally. You are truly a hero and an inspiration. Thank you.”
That letter made my day and reminded me once again of why I do what I do. There is a sense of accomplishment in being able to help people, and in this case, pets. (My dog expects no less from me.) Knowing there are now potential consequences (big $$$) for harming animals might dissuade some from inflicting such harm. For that I am happy.