Cat owner brings lily home, cat eats lily, cat on dialysis, owner sues grocery store

[Julie and Charlie]

People like this make me angry. This cat has a stupid, careless owner who has no sense of personal responsibility. Poor cat.

Dunno about you, but I can rattle off about 10 things that must absolutely stay out of Charlie's reach- chocolate, onions, garlic, grapes, and macademia nuts among them. If I had a kitty, lilies would be on my list.

Southeast Portland cat's dialysis after eating lily triggers lawsui...

"The story starts off sweet: As he often did, Charley Gee picked up flowers for his wife while grocery shopping.

On this particular day in February 2012, he chose "Love Story Lily." The flower was packaged with a warning about not being for human consumption and about the risk of staining clothing, but there was nothing about potential harm to cats, said the Southeast Portland lawyer.

In the next 24 hours, Gee and his wife, Kara Bredahl, would rush their 8-year-old cat, Boogaloo, to DoveLewis Emergency Animal Hospital.

There, doctors flushed the cat's kidneys, put him on kitty dialysis and kept him for four days after the cat chewed on the leaves of the lily -- which is highly toxic to cats.

Now, Gee is suing New Seasons and its floral supplier, Bay City Flower Co. from Half Moon Bay, Calif., alleging product liability and negligence because they failed to label the flower with a cat-specific warning.

The lily was "unreasonably dangerous," according to the complaint, filed last week in Multnomah County Circuit Court.

Neither New Seasons nor Bay City immediately responded to messages for comment.

Gee argues that the responsibility lies entirely on the retailer and wholesaler to disclose the risk -- not on cat owners to know it themselves.

"When you have a consequence as high as that, it's up to the retailer or a manufacturer -- who are making money off this product -- to warn of these potential high consequences of buying the product," he said.

His animal-law attorney, Dane Johnson, cited floral industry papers alerting retailers to the risk lilies pose to cats.

In addition, Johnson noted that the companies did label the flower with the not-for-human-consumption warning and the staining alert.

Those warnings could actually lull buyers into a "false sense of security," Johnson said. The buyer would not realize there are other hazards.

In addition to seeking $1,542.47 in veterinary bills, Gee wants Bay City and New Seasons to specifically label lilies as highly toxic to cats. He said he filed the lawsuit after both companies declined to pay the vet bills and add labeling.

Boogaloo has made a full recovery, Gee said. His flower shopping, however, has not.

Now, if he buys flowers, he doesn't bring them home, he said. They go directly to his wife's office."

[F, Calla & Luca]

It really get ridiculous. Poor cat, stupid people.

[Karen, Jasper and Jackdoodle]

Perfectly stated, F. I agree. 

[Sheila & Finnley]

Because I love my kitties every bit as much as Finnley, I haven't received a bouquet of flowers in quite a few years. It was my choice when I asked my hubby to not buy them anymore. That was after I first got a cat, and later caught kitty trying to eat a flower out of my anniversary bouquet.

Now my hubby buys me lots of outside flowers in the spring, to make up for the rest of the year with no special bouquets !

Yup, some people are STUPID and GREEDY !! 

[Laurie, Fudge, and Vern]

I hope this case gets thrown out of court, but sadly, it won't, and a lot of time and money get wasted in the process. Since when is it up to everyone else to know what you should and shouldn't bring into your household when you have kids and pets? It is like the hot coffee suit brought against McDonald's. You spill hot coffee on yourself and end up with a huge settlement. Nuts, I say! F is right.

[Lonnie & Libby Lu]

Totally agree!!!!

[Lori, Quincy & Frankie]

I am not a pet malpractice expert, but in my state, this case would need expert testimony to prove that the flower is toxic and that the toxic nature is what caused the cat's renal failure.  Plus the cat apparently survived with minimal damage/costs.  Not a big damage award here based on the information we have, and so not a big fee involved for the attorney or the owners.  Experts cost money too, so someone (again I am guessing)  is funding this lawsuit other than the owners (unless they have some spare cash and high ideals).  My guess is it is an animal rights group looking for a situation to champion better information for consumers.  Stupid consumers, but yes, consumers and pet owners.  

[Julie and Charlie]

The plaintiff is a personal injury lawyer!

[Lori, Quincy & Frankie]

They will still need experts and will have to pay court filing fees and court reporter fees.  I would like to hear the answer as to why they did not supervise the cat and allowed it to eat the lily...

[Sheila & Finnley]

Laurie, did you say Nuts, or spill hot coffee on your Nuts ?? LOL

[Donna K & Quincy]

The lily was "unreasonably dangerous," according to the complaint.  You just never know when a rogue lily is going to ambush and assault you. 

Cat owner brings lily home, cat eats lily, cat on dialysis, owner sues grocery store, owner is an idiot.

This says it all

 

[Laurie, Fudge, and Vern]

LOL.....those rogue lilies get me every time :)

[Lonnie & Libby Lu]

Love this button!!