St. John's Law Review

Pawing Open the Courthouse Door: Why Animals’ Interests Should Matter When Courts Grant Standing

By: Lauren Magnotti

Abstract by: Daniel Egan

Animals are living beings possessing characteristics that make them inherently different from inanimate pieces of personal property; yet, animals continue to be viewed as mere property under the law. Animals have no legal personhood and, as a result, they cannot bring suit on their own behalf. Rather, an individual or organization must bring suit on behalf of animals, and they must independently satisfy the requirements for standing. Without a direct injury to the party, the cause of action will not proceed.

To allow suit only where a human being suffers injury ignores the fact that animals themselves have interests entitled to legal protection. The main concern of the plaintiff is the welfare of the animal, and it should not be necessary to force the plaintiff to plead some sort of injury to themselves. Courts must discontinue categorizing animals as mere property. Animals are qualitatively different that other items of personal property, and it is time the law recognized this.