Breaking up is tough to do. Couples need to settle on who gets what, frequently causing conflicts over anything from furnishings to meals. Things get even more made complex in custody cases, where couples should let a judge or concur choose how living beings will divide their time in between moms and dads. When fur infants go into the formula, the laws governing this procedure as it relates to human beings is rather clear however things get a bit dirty.

Jessica Sardina of Bangor, Maine looked for to clear this up in her defend custody of a precious embraced canine called Honey. She and her previous partner, Kelvin Liriano, were sharing a life together under the exact same roofing system, that consisted of Honey, a lovable Boxer-Lab mix. Regardless of the truth that the pet dog was formally embraced by Liriano, Sardina was Honey’’ s mother and the set were obviously firmly bonded.

View this post on Instagram

This story is far from over. It won’’ t be till my Honey lady is back house. #thehoneylaw #bringhoneyhome #honeythedog #worthy #mybaby

A post shared by Jessica Sardina (@jesssardina) on May 19, 2019 at 2:54 pm PDT

All 50 states think about animals to be residential or commercial property and they are dealt with as such in cases including divorce. Custody contracts are scheduled for human offspring with the exception of the states of California, Alaska, and Illinois. Marital relationships being liquified in those states go through unique guidelines governing the custody of animals. Sardina and her legal representative felt that it was due time that animals fall under custody guidelines, not those governing residential or commercial property. They continued combating her case all the method to the Supreme Court of Maine.

Gene Sullivan, Sardina’’ s lawyer stated, “““ “ Hey, this is not a toaster. This is not a mixer. This is a living, breathing animal that these celebrations, particularly my customer, grew an accessory to.””

. View this post on Instagram .


Always with her mom. Every second of every day because we initially brought her house. #bringhoneyhome #thehoneylaw #honeythedog

A post shared by Jessica Sardina (@jesssardina) on May 15, 2019 at 1:58 pm PDT

A lower court ruled in favor of Liriano based upon the truth that his signature appeared on Honey’’ s adoption documentation. He was considered the sole ““ owner ” of Honey and hence, need to be enabled to preserve ownership. In their interest the greater court, Sullivan argued for Sardina that this view of an animal as home to be owned is old-fashioned.

Further, Sardina declared that she did most of the care taking and had a more detailed bond to Honey than the ““ owner ” did. She declared that Liriano did not have the appropriate funds or time to correctly take care of Honey which he is an unsuited family pet moms and dad.

View this post on Instagram

About a month earlier, I bought this customized, handmade leather collar for Honey. It will advise me every day that whatever I’’ m doing right’now, I ’ m providing for her. Till the day she comes house to use it, it will act as my tip to do whatever I can to make that take place. Merry Christmas, Honey lady. Your mom misses you more than you understand. ❤ ❤ ❤ #TheHoneyLaw #comehomesoon

A post shared by Jessica Sardina (@jesssardina) on Dec 19, 2018 at 9:28 am PST

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Maine, Leigh Saufley, confessed that the case moves the heartstrings and anybody would feel bad for an individual who needs to lose their cherished family pet in a separate. She questioned whether choosing on the case was an excellent usage of the court’’ s time and resources, especially in a case including a couple that was not wed.

View this post on Instagram

Your mother misses you every day, Honey woman. You’’ ll be home quickly. ❤ #TheHoneyLaw #mybaby #dogmom

A post shared by Jessica Sardina (@jesssardina) on Dec 8, 2018 at 12:58 pm PST

Ultimately, Honey was considered to be the ““ residential or commercial property ” of Liriano and Sardina ’ s fight was lost. In her Instagram feed, Sardina has actually shared various videos and pictures of her and Honey together that show just how much love lived in between them. Not a peep is to be discovered from Liriano in defense of himself or his right to keep custody of Honey, however let’’ s hope he is making a delighted, caring house for her today and permanently more.

What is your take? Should Honey be considered as ““ residential or commercial property ” or dealt with more like human kids are dealt with in these cases? Does it matter that the couple wasn’’ t wed? Share your ideas with the iHD neighborhood!

Featured Image Jessica Sardina Instagram

The post Woman Takes Dog Custody Battle All The Way To State Supreme Court appeared initially on .

Read more: