27/01/2022
C this animal husbandry manager lost out on three horses on penalty rendered, three years after assault. C the judge hand down judgment against assault, counting losses.
If three horses bred for three years, yielding one foal per year, and each mare was to be bought three years younger than breeding time, then at judgment time, the judge totaled 9 foals lost. If three new foals were bought at judgment time, and allowed three years to begin breeding, then the breeder at present would have to wait another three years to earn the first foal. Therefore, the judge declared that breeding would have began three years after initial assault, today. The judge charged the assaulter for three years of breeding of three horses, at one foal per mare, counting 9 foals in total, at $10,000 per foal. Totalling $90,000 for the lost breeding alone. Then comes alimony of tripling of the total, for lost opportunities that would have been exploited, had breeding income for three years been available. Now $270,000. Subtract the initial amount of $30,000 owed, and see the $240,000 extra paid amount, represent another scoffer playing to be the tougher. Oh what a bluffer.
The judge later tho, warranted that six years later, the breeder would not only have three horses and three foals, but a host of foals of selected choice bred over time, that elevated another alimony of triple, of the final amount to $810,000, in an effort to reclaim his rights to his breeding in meeting demand.
But wait, horses don't exceed a $3,900,000 usd judgment on two dogs in comparison.
