Only human beings and legislatively created legal entities can sue under Oregon law. Not horses.

That’s what the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled on the last day of August.

Do you think the court got it right?

Kim Mosiman, executive director of Sound Equine Actions, filed a complaint with Justice, a horse, as plaintiff and “claimed negligence against his former owner.”

A veterinarian had determined that Justice was underfed and emaciated. The horse was some 300 pounds underweight and had difficulty walking. The owner voluntarily surrendered the horse.

The horse’s condition improved but will require extra care, medications and more for the rest of his life.

The case set off a public policy debate. What rights should animals have? Do they or should they have the right to sue? Or perhaps a limited right to sue in specific circumstances?

However you feel about that, the court ruled those rights do not exist at present under Oregon law.

It came as a relief for the Oregon Farm Bureau, the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association and the Oregon Dairy Farmers Association, as the Capital Press reported. Those organizations worried about what precedent any decision would set.

There may be an appeal.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund says it will petition the Oregon Supreme Court.

“The lawsuit is fundamentally about an animal’s right to be free from illegal animal cruelty,” Christopher Berry, the group’s managing attorney, said according to the Capital Press. “It does not extend any further than that.”

Gwendolyn Vercher, the horse’s owner, was punished. She received three years probation and had to pay $4,000 in fees.

We don’t know what the Oregon Supreme Court will do. But if you think animals should have the right to sue in some instances or don’t, tell your legislator.