A person who injures a pet negligently can be sued for emotional distress by the pet owner. True or False?

The statement is false because emotional distress claims generally do not extend to the injury of pets in the same way they do for human beings. In most jurisdictions, while the law recognizes the emotional bond between pets and their owners, this connection does not afford the same legal protections that a person would have in cases of emotional distress. Typically, the law allows for claims related to the physical damage to the pet itself, such as veterinary expenses, but not for the intangible emotional distress that might arise from witnessing such an injury to a pet.

While there are exceptions in some jurisdictions that allow emotional distress claims if certain criteria are met, such as the owner being a witness to the injury, this is not the general rule applied nationwide. Therefore, the assertion that one can sue for emotional distress simply because a pet was injured is not supported broadly by tort law.