Quantitative and qualitative analysis of lawsuits against veterinarians and correlation of potential risk factors with court decisions.

The increase in lawsuits against veterinarians based on recklessness, negligence and malpractice is a current trend since pets are increasingly viewed as part of the family, and legal action is sought if the owner is frustrated with the services rendered by the veterinarian. However, since scarce data exists on this issue, this study aims to quantify and qualify lawsuits filed against veterinarians in the state of São Paulo, Brazil to identify and correlate potential risk factors that may lead to conviction or acquittal of defendants. For this purpose, the methodology employed a search for lawsuits on the website of the São Paulo State Court of Justice, sorted by year; proceedings (summary or special civil court); plaintiff's claim (non-economic damages, economic damages, malpractice, negligence or recklessness); court decision (case granted or denied); reason for judgment (sufficient or insufficient evidence); reverse burden of proof (present or absent); type of evidence (deposition, documentary and expert testimony); value of damages claimed and awarded; location (greater São Paulo or inner state), and whether the lawsuit was filed against a veterinary clinic or hospital. These categories shed light, through bivariate and Poisson regression analyses, on the potential risk factors relative to court decisions. Results demonstrate that reverse burden of proof and insufficient evidence as the basis for judgment were, respectively, risk factors for conviction and acquittal of veterinary practitioners, and the number of lawsuits increased by 533 % over eight years.