can the breeder take my dog away in replevin action

[not2cleverRed]

No, it would not be a good idea to sue, counter sue, whatever, for pain and suffering.

You got an expensive dog, for free. Why did your friend give it to you? Why haven't you had the dog spayed? Why are you breeding this dog?

I suspect that the other person's argument is going to be along the lines of this: if I am repossessing a car that I sold to George for breach of contract, but George gave the car to Sue, then I would go to Sue to get the car, because she is the one who currently has it in her possession. The fact that she is not a party to the original contract, and may not have known the conditions of the original contract, does not mean that terms of the contract are meaningless, and I have no recourse.

Yes, I get that a dog is a living, breathing thing, unlike a car, and that you have bonded with it.

The fact is that you had an inkling that the breeder had an ongoing interest in how the dog was being cared for, and that your friend who "gave" it to you might have breached their contract. Suppose the contract stated instead of "resold" that the dog could not be rehomed during that period without the breeder's approval? Was your breeding of the dog accidental (meaning you are an irresponsible owner), or are you trying to make money off the puppies (meaning you are dishonest, as you and your friend knew full well that the breeder was not selling the dog for breeding purposes - perhaps it has some flaws, and she wants to maintain her reputation as a breeder)?

 

[adjusterjack]

You have made a conclusion that cannot be sustained with the facts given, namely "Claimant is legally entitled to the immediate, exclusive possession and control of the subject property."

True.

The breeder MIGHT have such a sustainable claim (or might not) but that's up to the court to decide.

Meantime, I have to agree with Latigo that the breeder does have a cause of action against the OP and defending on the basis of privity of contract is not necessarily going to succeed.

And Wisconsin small claims court does allow attorneys.

 

[quincy]

Following is a link to a good article on transfer-of-ownership and condition-subsequent clauses that are often found in animal-sale contracts.

The article was written by Cherie Travis, 2011 adjunct professor of animal law, DePaul University College of Law, Northwestern University School of Law, President and cofounder of PACT Humane Society.

http://www.animalsheltering.org/resources/magazine/mar_apr_2011/law_forum_avoiding_adopter_roulette.pdf

The terms and conditions as outlined in the contract between the original buyer and the seller needs to be reviewed in its entirety before it can be said if there is any action to be taken against merry27. State animal laws need to be reviewed, as well, as not all states find "reclaim" provisions in animal sales contracts legal. It will depend on how the state looks at animals and I have not looked over the laws of Wisconsin (although I suppose I could when I have the time).

Consulting with an attorney well-versed in animal law in Wisconsin would probably be a good idea, if merry27 wishes to keep her dog and hopes to mount a winning defense against any breach of contract claim filed against her and the first buyer.