## Facts

- Tracy Price delivered her English bulldog to Dr. Nancy O. Brown, a veterinarian, for surgical correction of a prolapsed urethra.
- Price visited the dog the next evening, observed it was panting and groggy, and requested 24-hour monitoring; an employee assured her monitoring would occur.
- Price alleged the dog was left unattended after midnight and died the following morning while hospitalized under Brown’s care.
- Price sued seeking the dog’s alleged fair market value ($1,200).
- The complaint asserted liability only on a bailment theory, alleging Price entrusted the dog to Brown with an understanding it would be returned in the same general good health and that Brown breached that agreement by failing to monitor the dog and failing to return it in good health.
- The trial court sustained preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and dismissed without prejudice; Price declined to amend to plead professional negligence.
- The Superior Court reversed, holding the bailment pleading was sufficient and that bailment questions were for the fact-finder.

## Issues

1. Whether a complaint alleging only breach of a bailment agreement states a cause of action against a veterinarian for injury or death of an animal entrusted for surgical and professional treatment.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversed the Superior Court and reinstated the trial court’s order sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the complaint.
- The court held that a bailment-only complaint does not state a cause of action for harm arising from veterinary surgical or professional treatment.
- The court concluded that claims based on such treatment must be pleaded as professional negligence rather than reframed as bailment to obtain bailment-based presumptions.

## Legal Principles

- Bailment involves delivery of personal property for a limited purpose with an express or implied agreement for return or disposition as directed after the purpose is fulfilled.
- When an animal is entrusted to a veterinarian for surgery or other professional treatment, the transaction’s core is professional medical care requiring specialized skill and judgment, not mere custody of property.
- Liability for harm arising from veterinary professional services is governed by professional negligence principles, requiring allegations (and proof) that the veterinarian failed to meet the profession’s standard of care and that the breach caused the harm.
- Bailment presumptions tied to non-return or return in damaged condition are not a substitute for pleading and proving malpractice in the professional-treatment context.
- Bailment concepts may apply to animals in non-medical contexts (e.g., boarding or transport), but not to claims whose gravamen is the quality of professional veterinary treatment.

## Conclusion

Because Price pleaded only breach of bailment and did not allege professional negligence in connection with veterinary surgical and post-operative care, the complaint failed to state a cognizable cause of action, and dismissal on demurrer was proper.


Price v. Brown, 545 Pa. 216, 680 A.2d 1149 (Pa. 1996)