Can I sue for my cat? We signed a contract.

[pricelece]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California


My ex and I created a written contract to declare my move out date and to decide how we would split up the cats we adopted together. I love them both and have become so attached. I already have to accept the fact that I will never see one again and now I might lose the other?? Unfortunately when we adopted them, it was cheaper to take them as a pair under one owner instead of me adopting one and him the other. I agreed to this because our relationship was very strong and serious at that time but I was also told that that there was nothing to worry about if anything went wrong because we lived together for a year with the cats and split every expense (including the adoption costs). The agreement states that as long as I moved out by a certain date (about 3 weeks from now and about 30 days from the date of the contract) that he would sign over one of the cats to me. (We chose and named the cat in the contract). Now that I have fulfilled my end of the agreement by moving out and about 3 weeks early, now it is his turn to sign over one of the cats and he says he will not. I have brought up the fact that we have a signed contract but he refuses. There have been other things going on like his mother coming from out of state who, while I was at work moved my things into a corner and threatened to convince the landlord to evict me, refusing to acknowledge the written agreement in place. I have the original that was signed by the ex, the "owner" on paper and I. I also have all of the receipts and checks to and from each other for pet expenses. Can I sue for Cats in small claims or any court? I looked into it and the instructions say to file for a dollar amount. I don't want any money. I just want my cat..

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California


My ex and I created a written contract to declare my move out date and to decide how we would split up the cats we adopted together. I love them both and have become so attached. I already have to accept the fact that I will never see one again and now I might lose the other?? Unfortunately when we adopted them, it was cheaper to take them as a pair under one owner instead of me adopting one and him the other. I agreed to this because our relationship was very strong and serious at that time but I was also told that that there was nothing to worry about if anything went wrong because we lived together for a year with the cats and split every expense (including the adoption costs). The agreement states that as long as I moved out by a certain date (about 3 weeks from now and about 30 days from the date of the contract) that he would sign over one of the cats to me. (We chose and named the cat in the contract). Now that I have fulfilled my end of the agreement by moving out and about 3 weeks early, now it is his turn to sign over one of the cats and he says he will not. I have brought up the fact that we have a signed contract but he refuses. There have been other things going on like his mother coming from out of state who, while I was at work moved my things into a corner and threatened to convince the landlord to evict me, refusing to acknowledge the written agreement in place. I have the original that was signed by the ex, the "owner" on paper and I. I also have all of the receipts and checks to and from each other for pet expenses. Can I sue for Cats in small claims or any court? I looked into it and the instructions say to file for a dollar amount. I don't want any money. I just want my cat..

Your contract doesn't give a specific time for performance.

 

[pricelece]

The intention of the document is that the cat will be signed over immediately upon my move out. But even so he is not saying that he will not sign over right now. He is saying never. Do I have a case? Is this small claims? Do I sue for a dollar amount if I don't want money and want property?

Thank you

 

[Zigner]

The last time that I advised somebody that "injunctive relief" was not an option in California small claims cases, I was corrected by another member who is more knowledgeable than I in these matters. However, I *still* don't see injunctive relief listed as an option on the court's information web site.

You may want to check out http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp/smallclaims/scqna.htm



PS: You are looking for the ex to do be ordered to do a certain thing. known as "injunctive relief".

 

[pricelece]

Injunctive relief or small claims?

Is injunctive relief family law? The clerk at the court never heard of it. Does anyone else have any suggestions? How do I sue for property? I don't want money. Can I state one dollar and make a note that it is property that I want?

 

[Zigner]

Is injunctive relief family law? The clerk at the court never heard of it. Does anyone else have any suggestions? How do I sue for property? I don't want money. Can I state one dollar and make a note that it is property that I want?

Injunctive relief simply means that the court orders the other person to do something. What you are trying to do is to get the court to order the other party to turn over the cat to you. I am not convinced that small claims court allows for that in California...

 

[pricelece]

Thank you zinger..... Can anyone else chime in? Please? I an really looking for what I can do versus what I can't do.

 

[Isis1]

Injunctive relief simply means that the court orders the other person to do something. What you are trying to do is to get the court to order the other party to turn over the cat to you. I am not convinced that small claims court allows for that in California...

Right now, I desperately wish I hadn't thrown my class notes away, because I am pretty darn sure you are right. She can only get monetary value of the cat. So she can purchase another cat. That's all a judge sill order.

And OP, don't even bother going to family court with this. It doesn't belong there.

 

[Zigner]

Right now, I desperately wish I hadn't thrown my class notes away, because I am pretty darn sure you are right. She can only get monetary value of the cat. So she can purchase another cat. That's all a judge sill order.

And OP, don't even bother going to family court with this. It doesn't belong there.

Everything I've found says the same thing...SCC is for monetary judgments only in California. But, when I mentioned that previously in a thread that CC was involved with, she said that, for the past year-ish, things had changed. She did not, however, offer up any cite on that at the time.

 

[pricelece]

Thanks everyone.

 

[latigo]

I don’t disagree with Z in the respect that under given circumstances a court has equitable power by way of an injunction to order someone to do something or not do something.

But I totally disagree that injunctive relief is a substitute for a civil action in replevin (or claim and delivery) of personal property. Principally because one of the elements that must exist before injunctive relief can be granted is the absence of an adequate remedy at law. *

And here you do have an adequate remedy at law as I mentioned in the form of a civil action for replevin of the cat.

As far as bringing you action to get the cat back in a there is nothing in the California Code of Civil of Procedure (Sections 116.110 to 161.950) the either allows or precludes a California small claims court form assuming jurisdiction in an action for replevin, provided the value of the property sought to be recovered doesn’t exceed the jurisdiction limit.

In fact other states such as Florida specifically allow replevin actions in small claims.

Furthermore, California Code of Civil Procedure 116.610. (a) reads as follows:

“The small claims court shall give judgment for damages, or equitable relief, or both damages and equitable relief, within the jurisdictional limits stated in Sections 116.220, 116.221, and 116.231, and may make any orders as to time of payment or otherwise as the court deems just and equitable for the resolution of the dispute.”

So, I would have you go ahead and file the claim. The worst that could happen from a jurisdictional standpoint is that the court would remove the claim to Superior Court.

BUT ALSO, you are relying to heavily on this agreement wherein you say the ex agreed to “release” one of the cats to you. He doesn’t have to release anything for you to prove your joint ownership of the two cats.


[*] “The award of injunctive relief is appropriate in those cases where the moving party can demonstrate that (1) no adequate remedy at law exists; Daniels vs. Southfort - United Court of Appeals 7th Circuit Case No. 92-3345 (1993)

 

[Zigner]

I don’t disagree with Z in the respect that under given circumstances a court has equitable power by way of an injunction to order someone to do something or not do something.

But I totally disagree that injunctive relief is a substitute for a civil action in replevin (or claim and delivery) of personal property. Principally because one of the elements that must exist before injunctive relief can be granted is the absence of an adequate remedy at law. *

And here you do have an adequate remedy at law as I mentioned in the form of a civil action for replevin of the cat.

As far as bringing you action to get the cat back in a there is nothing in the California Code of Civil of Procedure (Sections 116.110 to 161.950) the either allows or precludes a California small claims court form assuming jurisdiction in an action for replevin, provided the value of the property sought to be recovered doesn’t exceed the jurisdiction limit.

In fact other states such as Florida specifically allow replevin actions in small claims.

Furthermore, California Code of Civil Procedure 116.610. (a) reads as follows:

“The small claims court shall give judgment for damages, or equitable relief, or both damages and equitable relief, within the jurisdictional limits stated in Sections 116.220, 116.221, and 116.231, and may make any orders as to time of payment or otherwise as the court deems just and equitable for the resolution of the dispute.”

So, I would have you go ahead and file the claim. The worst that could happen from a jurisdictional standpoint is that the court would remove the claim to Superior Court.

BUT ALSO, you are relying to heavily on this agreement wherein you say the ex agreed to “release” one of the cats to you. He doesn’t have to release anything for you to prove your joint ownership of the two cats.


[*] “The award of injunctive relief is appropriate in those cases where the moving party can demonstrate that (1) no adequate remedy at law exists; Daniels vs. Southfort - United Court of Appeals 7th Circuit Case No. 92-3345 (1993)

Thanks for the clarification Latigo...

 

[Just Blue]

Thank you zinger..... Can anyone else chime in? Please? I an really looking for what I can do versus what I can't do.

Since you seem to care about your animal...Is it in her/his interest to be separated from his/her "litter mate"?

 

[pricelece]

In this case, I think so. The cats are not related and the older one tolerates the younger one. The younger one just wants a playmate - I dont think it would matter who it was. It would be a transition, yes, but I think it would be OK.

 

[pricelece]

Thank you, your explanation is very helpful. I went ahead with the small claims filing. Court date is set.

I don’t disagree with Z in the respect that under given circumstances a court has equitable power by way of an injunction to order someone to do something or not do something.

But I totally disagree that injunctive relief is a substitute for a civil action in replevin (or claim and delivery) of personal property. Principally because one of the elements that must exist before injunctive relief can be granted is the absence of an adequate remedy at law. *

And here you do have an adequate remedy at law as I mentioned in the form of a civil action for replevin of the cat.

As far as bringing you action to get the cat back in a there is nothing in the California Code of Civil of Procedure (Sections 116.110 to 161.950) the either allows or precludes a California small claims court form assuming jurisdiction in an action for replevin, provided the value of the property sought to be recovered doesn’t exceed the jurisdiction limit.

In fact other states such as Florida specifically allow replevin actions in small claims.

Furthermore, California Code of Civil Procedure 116.610. (a) reads as follows:

“The small claims court shall give judgment for damages, or equitable relief, or both damages and equitable relief, within the jurisdictional limits stated in Sections 116.220, 116.221, and 116.231, and may make any orders as to time of payment or otherwise as the court deems just and equitable for the resolution of the dispute.”

So, I would have you go ahead and file the claim. The worst that could happen from a jurisdictional standpoint is that the court would remove the claim to Superior Court.

BUT ALSO, you are relying to heavily on this agreement wherein you say the ex agreed to “release” one of the cats to you. He doesn’t have to release anything for you to prove your joint ownership of the two cats.


[*] “The award of injunctive relief is appropriate in those cases where the moving party can demonstrate that (1) no adequate remedy at law exists; Daniels vs. Southfort - United Court of Appeals 7th Circuit Case No. 92-3345 (1993)