Here's the scenario... Alvin Mullen was walking his Cavalier King Charles Spaniel/Bichon Frise mix in the courtyard of his apartment complex. He encountered one of his neighbors, Gerardo Oseguera, and his Pit Bull mix, Diesel.
Diesel ended up charging after Mullen's dog. Diesel bit the smaller dog in its back. Fortunately, Mullen managed to pull his dog away from Diesel and Oseguera was able to get control of his dog again. Mullen's dog was treated for the bite wounds and he was eventually awarded $388 in vet bills.
But I was mainly interested in Oseguera's counter-claim. He sued Mullen for an unspecified amount because he was forced to get rid of his Pit Bull mix following the attack. He questioned whether or not Diesel actually bit the smaller dog despite photographic evidence of the bite wounds and vet reports about the bites. And he tried arguing that the smaller dog was actually injured by Mullen yanking the smaller dog away from the fun-loving Diesel.
He argued that Diesel was a specially trained emotional support animal for his disabled mother -- which set Judge Judy off. "Why would you own a dog that has the capacity -- you know of, because you just said it to me. 'If my dog, which is a big boy, locks jaws on the dog he's gonna kill him!' Why would you want a dog like that??"
To which Oseguera said, "I don't discriminate on dogs..." Judge Judy thought that was a stupid answer.
Needless to say, his counter-claim was thrown out.