I agree. I can see some possibility that the owners of the dog could make a court feel sorry for them because they had to accept putting down the beloved family dog...while I can also see that same court slamming them with huge punnies if they were ordered to remove the dog from the area if they did not do so.
The community views on euthanizing dogs could play a role as could other factors, including the dog's role in its owner's life (e.g., show dog, service dog, etc).
It is impossible to say, with the little we know, why the attorneys believed the dog's euthanasia would make a difference in the amount of damages that might be awarded in the civil action. But if the attorneys recommended that the dog not be euthanized, and the judge agreed with their recommendation, obviously there was
some reasoning behind it.