Pet Custody FAQ

California made significant changes to how pets are treated in divorce with the passage of AB 2274, which added Family Code Section 2605 effective January 1, 2019. Previously, California courts treated pets strictly as personal property, awarding them to one spouse based solely on property division principles. Under the new law, courts can consider the care of the pet and may assign sole or joint ownership based on what is best for the animal.

The court considers factors such as which spouse typically provided food, water, veterinary care, exercise, and daily attention. While Family Code Section 2605 does not explicitly use the term "best interest of the pet," it authorizes courts to look beyond mere property value and consider the animal's welfare when making custody determinations. This change aligns California with a growing number of states recognizing that pets occupy a unique position between mere property and family members. However, the law applies only to community property pets, not separate property pets.

Under California Family Code Section 2605, courts may consider the care of the pet animal when assigning ownership in a divorce. While the statute does not enumerate specific factors, courts have looked at several considerations in practice. Who primarily feeds, waters, and cares for the pet's daily needs is often most significant. Courts examine who takes the pet to veterinary appointments and manages the pet's healthcare.

The living situation of each spouse post-divorce matters, including whether each has adequate space, a yard for dogs, or housing that permits pets. Who originally acquired the pet and who selected the pet may be considered. The emotional bond between the pet and each spouse, sometimes demonstrated through testimony and evidence of interaction, can influence decisions. If children are involved, courts may consider keeping the pet with the children to minimize disruption. Each spouse's work schedule and availability to care for the pet is relevant.

Yes, California Family Code Section 2605 explicitly authorizes courts to assign sole or joint ownership of community property pets. Joint ownership effectively creates a shared custody arrangement where both former spouses have time with the pet according to a schedule. Courts can establish specific schedules for exchanges, similar to child custody arrangements, determining which days or weeks each spouse has the pet.

The court can also include provisions about which spouse is responsible for veterinary expenses, food costs, grooming, and other care expenses. However, because pets are still legally classified as property rather than family members, there is no automatic right to visitation as there would be with children. If the court awards sole ownership to one spouse, that spouse has no legal obligation to allow the other spouse access to the pet. To protect your interests, negotiate pet custody terms in your marital settlement agreement with specific provisions about schedules, expense sharing, and dispute resolution.

Under California's community property laws, a pet acquired by one spouse before marriage is generally considered that spouse's separate property and is not subject to division in divorce. This means the spouse who owned the pet before marriage retains ownership after divorce, and Family Code Section 2605's provisions about considering the care of the pet do not apply because the court has no authority to divide separate property.

However, characterization can become complicated in several situations. If the pet was purchased with separate funds but both spouses' names appear on registration or adoption documents, an argument could be made for joint ownership. Gifts of pets from one spouse to the other during marriage create separate property of the recipient. If one spouse owned a pet before marriage but the other spouse became the primary caretaker during the marriage, the non-owner spouse has no legal claim to the pet despite the emotional bond. To avoid disputes, couples can address pet ownership in prenuptial or postnuptial agreements.

To build a strong case for pet custody in a California divorce, you should gather comprehensive evidence demonstrating your role as the primary caretaker. Collect veterinary records showing your name as the responsible party, records of appointments you scheduled and attended, and receipts for veterinary expenses you paid. Obtain purchase or adoption records showing your involvement in acquiring the pet.

Compile receipts for pet food, supplies, grooming, training, and other care expenses you paid. Document your daily care routine through photographs and videos showing you feeding, walking, grooming, and interacting with the pet. Get statements from witnesses such as neighbors, friends, dog park acquaintances, groomers, dog walkers, and veterinary staff who observed you caring for the pet. Demonstrate that your post-divorce living situation is suitable for the pet, including pet-friendly housing, adequate space, and proximity to veterinary care.

California law provides special protections for pets in domestic violence situations, recognizing that abusers often harm pets as a means of controlling victims. Under Family Code Section 6320, a domestic violence restraining order can include provisions granting the protected person exclusive care, possession, and control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing in the residence.

The court can order the restrained person to stay away from the pet and prohibit any interference with the protected person's right to possess the animal. Penal Code Section 597.7 makes it a crime to harm an animal in order to injure, coerce, or threaten another person. Research shows that victims of domestic violence often delay leaving abusive situations out of concern for their pets, and abusers frequently threaten or harm pets to maintain control. California's laws address this by ensuring victims can obtain protection for their animals.

Yes, unmarried couples can have pet custody disputes, but these cases are handled differently than disputes between divorcing spouses. Family Code Section 2605 specifically applies to proceedings for dissolution of marriage or legal separation, so it does not govern disputes between unmarried cohabitants. Instead, pet ownership disputes between unmarried couples are typically resolved through civil court as property disputes.

The analysis focuses on traditional property ownership principles such as who purchased the pet, whose name appears on registration or adoption documents, and who paid for the pet's care. Evidence of an agreement between the parties about pet ownership, even if informal, may be considered. Because pets have relatively low monetary value compared to litigation costs, many disputes between unmarried couples are appropriately handled in small claims court, where the limit is $12,500 in California. To avoid disputes, unmarried couples should create written pet ownership agreements specifying who owns the pet and what happens if the relationship ends.

Prenuptial agreements can effectively address pet ownership and custody, providing clarity and avoiding disputes if the marriage ends. California law generally enforces prenuptial agreements under Family Code Sections 1610-1617, though certain requirements must be met for enforceability. A prenuptial agreement can specify that a pet acquired before marriage remains the separate property of the original owner.

It can establish rules for pets acquired during the marriage, such as designating them as one spouse's separate property or providing a framework for deciding custody if divorce occurs. The agreement can include detailed provisions about what factors should be considered in determining custody, expense sharing during marriage, and how disputes will be resolved. To be enforceable, the agreement must be in writing, signed voluntarily by both parties who had at least seven days to review it before signing, and must not be unconscionable. Both parties should have independent legal counsel review the agreement.

When children are involved in a California divorce, their relationship with family pets can significantly influence pet custody decisions. Courts generally recognize that separating children from pets can add additional trauma to an already difficult situation. Family Code Section 2605 authorizes courts to consider the care of the pet, and the pet's relationship with children can be part of that analysis.

In practice, courts often prefer to keep pets with the children, which typically means the pet stays in the primary custodial parent's home. If parents share joint physical custody with relatively equal time, courts may consider arrangements where the pet travels with the children between homes. Evidence of a strong bond between a child and the pet can support an argument for keeping them together. If a child has special needs and the pet serves a therapeutic role, this relationship receives special consideration. However, the pet's wellbeing must also be considered, and constantly moving a pet between homes may not be in the animal's best interest.

Yes, you can request temporary pet custody orders during California divorce proceedings. These orders establish who has possession and care of the pet while the divorce is pending, which can take months or even years to finalize. To obtain temporary orders, you typically file a Request for Order with the court specifically addressing pet custody.

Your request should explain why temporary custody is necessary, who has been caring for the pet, your ability to provide appropriate care, and any urgent concerns about the pet's welfare. The court will schedule a hearing where both parties can present their positions. If there are concerns about immediate harm to the pet, such as neglect or threats to surrender the animal to a shelter, you may request emergency orders. Temporary orders help prevent disputes and ensure the pet receives consistent care during the divorce process. They also establish a status quo that may influence the final custody decision.