"How much is that doggy in the split-up"

Okay, I'm showing my age with that (lame) reference to popular music (of another century, no less). However, the ABA family law listserv recently circulated this appeals case from New Jersey, under the subject of "dog custody." While that label gets attention, the decision is not really about custody at all, with no analysis parallel to child custody (except for a footnote alluding to amicus briefs asking the court to apply a "best interest of the dog" standard).

In the end, the court said the woman should receive the dog, not just its cash value. The court's analysis went like this. Beginning with the finding of the lower court, the court determined that the couple had agreed that the woman would receive the dog when they divided their property upon their split. (The couple was not married, so this is not a divorce case, which is not relevant in the court's analysis.) Next, after the man refused to give the dog to the woman, the court said that she could demand the dog back and not have to settle for the monetary value of the dog. The court reasoned that the dog had sentimental value beyond what the couple had paid for it, therefore, the woman was entitled to receive the dog specifically in the division of the couple's property.