Angel Kitty Kat’s Story – TX

Doctor Karen Becker 13 hours ago via PostCron “Please tell me you’re not going to vaccinate me unnecessarily?” Of course not; we would never give vaccines to a dog that has had “puppy shots” as they are protected for life (like you!)

Angel's Story - Lucky's Legacy
This website (link bellow) is dedicated to all cats who have been diagnosed or lost their lives to Vaccine Associated Sarcoma and their human parents who have cared and grieved for them.

Angel Kitty Kat Gonzalez was a beautiful and sweet long haired Tortoiseshell cat. I had never owned a cat before Kitty Kat showed up on my doorstep in the fall of 2003. I had just moved from Rockport, Texas, to Corpus Christi, Texas, with my other fur baby, Sissy. Sissy is a miniature dachshund who is scared of her own shadow. Kitty Kat became Sissy’s very welcomed friend and protector immediately. When Sissy went outside to “do her business” Kitty watched over her to make sure

she made it back in through the doggy door safely. Kitty was very independent and loved to bring me “live” birds as presents to show her love.

When I took my pets to the veterinarian for wellness or illness visits I never questioned their care or treatment. I was naive in believing that my veterinarian was up to date on the latest and best medical care. I believed they loved my fur babies as much as I did. My baby, Kitty Kat, was euthanized on February 14, 2011, due to Vaccine Associated Sarcoma. I am currently involved in litigation against the veterinarian who treated Kitty Kat.

It’s official….Corpus Christi now has the lowest standard of veterinarian care. I lost my veterinarian lawsuit because “if all Corpus Christi veterinarians adhere
to same standards then it’s not negligence”. So what this means is the
veterinarian standard of care in Corpus Christi, Texas, is……
a. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to explain to you what vaccines he recommends, he can just inject your animal with whatever vaccine he wants.
b. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to explain to you the risks and benefits of the vaccines they inject.
c. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have
to obtain informed consent from the animal guardian.
d. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to use the safest vaccines available.
e. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to follow instructions on the vaccine manufacturers label.
F. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to
perform a feline leukemia blood test to check for exposure prior to injecting a
feline leukemia vaccine. Or even offer the blood test to the pet guardian.
g. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to inform pet guardians that
Corpus Christi allows a three year rabies vaccine, they can continue to inject
the rabies vaccine into your pet ANNUALLY subjecting them to over vaccination illnesses while banking profits.
h. The Corpus Christi veterinarian DOES NOT have to follow the recommended vaccination schedule set forth by The American Veterinary Medical Association, American Animal Hospital Association, The American Association of Feline Practitioners, and Texas A & M University.

Thanks Judge Brent Chesney for adding another LOW standard to Corpus Christi.


as you recall on May 9, 2012, Judge Brent Chesney ruled in favor of the defendant’s (vet) summary
judgement motion with the Court finding that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, that the Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the issues expressly set out in the Motion or in an answer or any other response of the Defendant, and that the Defendant …has disproved at least one element or the Plaintiff’s claims as a matter of law. Not too sure how the Judge reached that conclusion so May 30, 2012, I filed a Request for Finding of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Judge Chesney replied by
asking both sides to submit a “proposed finding of fact & conclusions of
law”. The defendant’s lawyer replied, “findings of fact and conclusions of law have no place in a summary judgment proceeding”. I knew this but thought I would try anyway. I wonder if Judge Chesney knew this before he requested us to submit our proposed findings of fact??? HHMMMMM interesting. Needless to say Judge Chesney DID NOT provide his findings of fact and conclusions of law.
On June 6, 2012, I filed a motion for a New Trial based on The court
granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendant although, it did not state which issue(s) was disproved as a matter of law.
• A fact issue exist whether Dr. S exercised the care and diligence which is ordinarily exercised by skilled veterinarians;
• A fact issue exist whether Dr. S veterinary treatment of Plaintiff’s cat deviated from the standard of veterinary care;
• A fact issue exists as to whether the vaccine(s) and injection location
caused the Vaccine Associated Sarcoma;
• The trial court considered evidence obtained illegally in another jurisdiction
in which Plaintiff objected to;
• The trial court erred in failing to analyze this case under the same standard applied to physicians and surgeons in medical malpractice cases;
• The trial court did not view evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and resolve all reasonable doubts about the facts in favor of the nonmoving party;
• The trial court judge considered evidence that could have been submitted but was not;
• Defendant’s expert testimony admitted into evidence did not meet the necessary standards of reliability and relevance;
• The trial court erred in excluding the deposition testimony of a Robert “Bob” Rogers, DVM, a veterinarian.
Motion for a new trial hearing will be on Friday July 20, 2012, at 9:00 am In
The County Court At Law No. 5 Nueces County Texas, Judge Brent Chesney.

July 29, 2012, Lawsuit Update….On July 20, 2012, I had a hearing in Judge Brent Chesney’s County Court At Law No. 5 on my Motion for a New Trial. This is what I presented…..

A. Nueces County Standard of Veterinary Care
1. Rabies Vaccine is administered in the Right Leg/Leukemia Vaccine is administered in the Left Leg
· Shaffer deposition pg. 21
· Ferris deposition pg. 75
· Garett (Expert Witness) deposition pg. 47
2. Testing for FeLV (Feline Leukemia) prior to administering a FeLV
· Shaffer deposition pg. 13
· Garett (Expert Witness) deposition pgs. 36 & 37
3. Does not vaccinate sick cats
· Shaffer deposition pg. 16
4. Informs clients (animal guardian) the name of vaccines recommended, risks, benefits and possible adverse reactions
· Shaffer deposition pg. 67
· Ferris deposition pgs. 36 & 37
· Garett (Expert Witness) deposition pgs. 36, 37, & 41
5. Advise clients (animal guardian) of vaccine label warning (Fevaxyn) injection site fibrosarcomas
· Shaffer deposition pg. 31

B. Deviation from Nueces County Veterinary Standard of Care
1. Rabies and Leukemia vaccines were both given in the Right Leg
2. Feline Leukemia test was not performed prior to vaccination
3. Vaccinated an unhealthy (sick) cat
4. Did not inform client (animal guardian) the name(s) of vaccines administered, risks, benefits, or possible adverse reactions
5. Did not mention the warning of injection site fibrosarcoma as stated on Fevaxyn vaccine label

C. Deviation from Nueces County Veterinary Standard of Care caused injury and damages
1. Kitty Kat was euthanized on 2.14.2011 due to injection site fibrosarcoma
2. Plaintiff (animal guardian) has sustained $26,099.18 in damages
3. Plaintiff (animal guardian) has been deprived of her basic fundamental right to a jury trial

D. Fact Issues
1. Location of administered vaccines
2. Was cat healthy enough for vaccines to be administered
3. Did the vaccines cause the injection site sarcoma
4. Did Shaffer (treating veterinarian) deviate from the Nueces County Standard of Care
5. Did deviation from the standard of care cause injury and damages

Judge Brent Chesney denied my motion for a new trial. Now I am wondering if bias against a Pro Se Plaintiff could have been an issue????

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. Abraham Lincoln

August 13, 2012 , Appeal was filed in the Texas 13th Court of Appeals.


Comments are closed.