Berry

Berry v. Frazier

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 28, 2023A164168California8,141 words

Opinion

Opinion

Petrou, J.

Filed 4/28/23

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

RYAN BERRY,

Plaintiff and Appellant, v. A164168

JEFFERY R. FRAZIER, DVM,

(County and City of San Francisco Defendant and Respondent. Super. Ct. No. CGC20587086)

Ryan Berry sued Jeffery R. Frazier, a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, for nominal and punitive damages based on the circumstances surrounding the euthanasia of her cat. 1 The gravamen of the operative pleading (the first amended complaint, hereafter FAC) is that Berry secured Frazier’s services to perform a humane euthanasia on her cat. Instead, and without Berry’s informed consent, Frazier performed the euthanasia by means of an unnecessary and unjustified intracardiac injection, resulting in a horrific and painful death for her cat and great emotional distress to Berry. The trial court granted

1 The FAC also named as defendants Vetted Petcare CA, Inc., a California Corporation, Vetted Petcare, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and two corporate officers (hereafter Vetted). The causes of action against these parties have been dismissed without…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.