Citizen in a RepublicNH Bill Briefing
← All bills

HB 593 · 2025 · House · Judiciary Committee

Loss of consortium for pets

AI-generated

relative to loss of consortium involving pets.

Expands the relationships eligible for loss of consortium damages to include pets, defines loss of consortium, and authorizes lawsuits against government officials who intentionally or recklessly and without legal justification cause a pet's death.AI-generated

Status

Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · March 6, 2025
  1. ✓Introduced
  2. ✕House
  3. Senate
  4. Governor
  5. Law

Analysis

This bill expands the relationships eligible for potential loss of consortium damages to include pets and defines "loss of consortium," and authorizes lawsuits against governmental officials, including law enforcement officers, that intentionally or recklessly and without legal justification cause the death of a pet.

From the bill's official ANALYSIS section.

In the bill's words

Quoted verbatim from the bill as introduced. Passages chosen from the operative text.Computed by this site

“Loss of consortium means the loss of love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support of a spouse or pet, the loss of the enjoyment of sexual relation of a spouse, or the loss of the ability to have children with a spouse.”
RSA 507:8-a
“Where fault on the part of the claimant or the claimant's spouse is found to have caused, in whole or in part, the injury to the spouse on which the claim for loss or impairment of consortium is based, damages recoverable shall be subject to diminution to the extent and in the manner provided for in RSA 507:7-d.”
RSA 507:8-a
“Where fault on the part of the claimant is found to have caused, in whole or in part, the injury to the pet owner on which the claim for loss or impairment of consortium is based, damages recoverable shall be subject to diminution to the extent and in the manner provided for in RSA 507:7-d.”
RSA 507:8-a
“A person may bring an action against any governmental official, including any law enforcement officer, under this paragraph, who intentionally or recklessly, and without legal justification, causes the death of that person's pet.”
RSA 507:8-a

Official record

Bill page — docket & status

gc.nh.gov · the authoritative source

Sponsors

Rep. Ellen ReadDPrimeDeputy Ranking Member· Housing
  • Rep. Peter BixbyDRanking Member· Environment and Agriculture
  • Rep. Tom MannionRAssistant Majority Whip

Also: Rep. Diane KelleyR, Rep. Tim MannionR, Rep. Paige BeaucheminD, Rep. Jodi NewellD

Public testimony

57 signed in online · 20 wrote testimony

28% support72% oppose0% neutral

In their wordsVerbatim, exactly as submitted

“While recognizing pets aren’t actually people, many of us consider pets to be a close and important family member. After reading the bill I believe the only people opposed would be those who think they’ll break the new law should it pass.…”
— Caroline Boyd, Amherstsupports
“THANK YOU!! Pets are FAMILY, not just property. Especially for those of us who are disabled and who have support pets.”
— Margaret Konze, Pembrokesupports
“While we all feel heavy sadness when we lose a pet, a bill like this isn't cut and dry. If someone is attacked by an animal and has to defend themselves, this opens up to law suits for the death of of said attacking animal.…”
— Cassandra Amarello, Portsmouthopposes
“I am writing in opposition to HB 593 on the grounds that it is a fundamental attempt to change the legal status of pets from the long standing tradition of property to a status approaching personhood.…”
— George Cook, Jeffersonopposes
“While pets are beloved family members, granting them legal standing through loss of consortium laws erodes our rights as owners and sets a precedent that could lead to severe legal consequences, increased liabilities, and restrictions on how we care for our own animals.…”
— Pamela Munroe, Portsmouthopposes

Verbatim excerpts of submitted testimony, quoted from the testimony tool.

Read the testimony · as of Aug 12, 2026

Votes

yeanay
Starting text: Bill as introduced
  • Feb 12, 2025HouseCommittee report· consent calendar: Inexpedient to Legislate11–0
    Overall
    100% yea
  • Mar 6, 2025HouseVoice voteInexpedient to Legislateadopted

Hearings and debates

  • Feb 12, 2025Public hearingHouse Judiciary4:41:10–4:43:172m 7slocated in the stream transcriptCommittee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate; Public Hearing; Executive Session
  • Mar 6, 2025Floor debateHouse floorWatchnot located in the transcript — opens the full streamInexpedient to Legislate — adopted, voice vote

Timestamps locate where this bill is taken up in the chamber's YouTube stream.

Legislative history

  1. Jan 9, 2025HouseIntroduced (in recess of) 01/09/2025 and referred to Judiciary HJ 3 P. 18
  2. Feb 12, 2025HousePublic Hearing: 02/12/2025 01:45 pm LOB 206-208
  3. Feb 12, 2025HouseExecutive Session: 02/12/2025 10:00 am LOB 206-208
  4. Feb 12, 2025HouseCommittee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate 02/12/2025 (Vote 11-0; CC) HC 14 P. 11
  5. Mar 6, 2025HouseInexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 03/06/2025 HJ 7 P. 16

Coverage

No reporting linked yet.

Documents (PDF)

Bill text & amendments link direct to gc.nh.gov; committee reports stream from the state record.