## Facts

- Robert Peloquin and his family took in a stray kitten, kept it as a family pet (“George”), and possessed it for about seven years.
- A neighbor borrowed an animal trap from the parish animal control center, set it in her yard, and trapped a cat alleged to be George.
- The neighbors returned the trap and cat to the animal control center, where the cat was destroyed.
- The defendants denied the destroyed cat was the Peloquins’ cat.
- The Peloquins sued the neighbors and the parish police jury/animal control for conversion and sought the cat’s value plus mental anguish, inconvenience, and humiliation damages.

## Issues

1. Whether a judgment sustaining exceptions that dismissed all non-pecuniary damages claims (leaving only the cat’s value) was a final, appealable judgment.
2. Whether long-term possessors of a stray pet had a right and cause of action for conversion and could seek mental anguish and related damages despite allegedly lacking formal ownership title.

## Decision

- The appellate court held the judgment was final and appealable because it determined the merits in part by dismissing major categories of damages.
- The court reversed the rulings sustaining the exceptions of no right of action and no cause of action as to the non-pecuniary damages claims.
- The court held the Peloquins’ long-term possession created a legally cognizable interest and a presumption of ownership sufficient to sue for conversion against third parties.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings on the full range of claimed damages.

## Legal Principles

- A judgment that determines the merits in whole or in part, including by dismissing discrete categories of damages, is a final judgment subject to appeal under Louisiana procedure.
- Peaceable, long-term possession of a movable creates a presumption of ownership and may support a conversion action against anyone other than the true owner.
- When a plaintiff has a legally recognized proprietary interest grounded in possession, the plaintiff may seek damages proximately caused by the alleged conversion, not limited as a matter of law to the item’s market value.

## Conclusion

The court held that long-term possessors of a family pet have standing to pursue conversion claims and may seek non-pecuniary damages for the alleged wrongful destruction of the animal, and that a judgment eliminating those damages is final and appealable even if a limited value claim remains pending.


Peloquin v. Calcasieu Par. Police Jury, 367 So. 2d 1246 (La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979)