[QUOTE=ljshorses;2967219]
The colt was 7months old. And he has never been lame or had swelling.
I have a double delimma where my husband is concerned, yes it is my business but he is a “silent” partner. It’s just that he doesn’t always remain silent, lol. He put up personal stock (got before our marriage) to help fund the purchasing of top mares. So I do feel a bit obligated to at least listen to his pont of view. I am truly certain that I didn’t misrepresent the colt in any way whatsoever and even questioned the pre-purchase vet about her not doing x-rays. But and to me this is a big but…I want happy clients and have had so up to this point. Plus I LOVE this colt and am not sure I’d want her to have him especially in a forceful manner. So that is why I am so torn. Personally I would feel better handing her back her money, but I certainly also agree with my hubby and where he comes from, damn…biggest problem with the horse business is you are so emotionally involved no matter what.[/QUOTE]
Geez what a mess… especially when it concerns a foal you’ve raised and cared for. Sounds like you’ve tried to do everything right… lots of lessons here for everyone. I agree with Darlyn’s comment, “tell me again, why the heck do we do this?”
If it were me, I’d settle this now out of court. I’m not an attorney, but I’m suspect your husband will tell you that before you could re-sell this little guy you’d have to get a court to enter a judgment in your favor (under some theory of abandonment I suspect) and then you’d have to foreclose on that judgment and re-sell the little guy. If the purchaser defends against the action, you could easily spend more fighting this in court than the baby is worth. For example, the purchaser may concede that the purchase transaction is complete, but she may ground her response/defense in some version of the Uniform Commercial Code or Lemon Law (alleging that, because of the OCD, your “product” was not fit for the intended purpose… and that you knew or should have known about the OCD). That would call into question whether either parent had previously transmitted OCD… and whether you (as a responsible breeder) had properly inquired about OCD prior to breeding, and whether the stallion owner misrepresented the OCD status of the stallion and what he has transmitted… did he have a history of transmitting OCD… and should you have known of this history. The claims you make in your advertising (e.g on your website) and claims made about the stallions you use in your breeding program (which are also on your website via links)could all be called into question as being misleading… it could go on forever.
Who knows, the purchaser may prevail and may even get damages… there was a case out in Washington State recently where a judge awarded treble damages because the seller of “a product” (in this instance a puppy) did not disclose that one of the grandfathers of the puppy had a congenital heart condition. (At the time the seller sold the puppy, the heart defect of the grandfather was not known, the judge didn’t seem to care). The court looked at the claims made on the seller’s website (about quality and heath testing) and found for the plaintiff. I am sure your husband will tell you that courts do all sorts of odd things…there is always risk in any litigation. Even with family member who is an attorney, the litigation itself will be taking his time and energy away from dealing with his paying clients. It is easier to settle this and move on… for your peace of mind and for this baby’s quality of life. Who knows, the owner of this foal’s sire may want you to move on, rather than have a public record of this sire producing OCD… the stallion owner may help out here.