Petco Animal Supplies was the brand from which a boy age 10 received a pet with the intention to care for it. However, the rat bit the child after a short while. The incident ended with the death of the victim because of the illness he contracted from the pet. As of Thursday, a federal court decided not to hold Petco responsible for the rat bite fever case.
The Plaintiff Accused Petco of Hiding Vital Information on the Back of a Card
The main explanation on which the jury formulated its ruling was that Petco Animal Supplies did its due diligence by informing customers on the dangers that accompany the ownership of a pet rat. As a consequence, the company was not found liable for the death of the 10-year-old Aidan Pankey in the year of 2013. The medical authority in the San Diego County confirmed that the cause of death is known as the rat bite fever. During the case, the Centers for Disease Control discovered that the pet had the streptobacillus moniliformis infection which is the scientific name for the condition that was passed on to the boy.
The plaintiff who is the father of the child, Andrew Pankey, considered Petco and its supplier, Barney’s Pets, responsible for the fatal fate of Aidan. He claimed that the company did not do everything in its power to inform its customers about the risks of having a pet rat. This is because the organization chose to hide vital details on the back of its animal companion card.
The Rat Bite Fever Is a Rare Condition and Hard to Trace
His attorney, John Gomez delivered his final plea on Thursday by claiming that the company could have done more. For instance, Petco disposed of ways to find out whether it delivers infected animals to customers or not. The company could have examined if the rats are hosting any trace of bacteria through lab tests.
On the other hand, the defendant had proof that the information about the risks was delivered to the victim upon the purchase. Kimberly Oberrecht was the lawyer of Petco and stated that the company did everything in its power to customers. Other arguments relied on the fact that the rat bite fever is a rare condition and there are no methods to determine the percentage of animals that carry these bacteria. The jury did not take long to deliver the verdict as the family signed the liability form that carried information about this precise condition. However, the father of the child is determined to appeal the decision.
Image source: 1