To raise awareness, Rehoboth woman suing Hershey Company

In an attempt to warn pet owners of dangers associated with sugar substitute Xylitol, a Rehoboth Beach woman is suing The Hershey Company for the wrongful death of her beloved Shih-tzu.

Filed in March, Joyce Lussier and Hershey attorney Blake Bennett were in Sussex County's Justice of the Peace Court 17 in Georgetown arguing their sides May 29. Lussier is asking for $15,000 in damages and also that Hershey be required to put a warning on its packages regarding the danger to pets.

Lussier began the hearing with her side of the story. She said in late 2017, her 7-month-old Shih-tzu, Petra, ate a piece of sugar-free Ice Breakers chewing gum, which is manufactured by Hershey. She said the puppy got into the package after she accidently knocked it off her desk at home.

Within a couple of hours, Petra was vomiting and barely moving, but eventually seemed to calm down, Lussier said. The next morning, Petra still wasn't moving, she said, and after taking the dog to a neighbor's house, it was rushed to Savannah Animal Hospital.

At that point, Lussier said, it was too late. Petra's liver was too far gone and she was only suffering, she said. After explaining to the vet the previous day's events, Lussier said, the veterinarian determined Petra must have eaten a piece of the Xylitol-containing gum.

"It never occurred to me to doubt a Hershey product," she said. "It was horrible."

Bennett began his line of questioning to Lussier by saying he and Hershey were sorry for her loss, but ultimately, the company was not in a position to reimburse every person with a complaint against the company.

Bennett asked Lussier if she originally thought the gum was the issue. At first, no, she said, explaining she thought Petra might have eaten something at the park earlier in the day, but after the veterinarian saw the liver damage it was determined the gum was the culprit.

Bennett then asked if Lussier knew not to give her dog other common household items like chocolate and poinsettias, despite there being no warning label on those items.

Lussier said she did, but the difference between those examples and the sugar-free gum is they would only make a dog sick, not kill it.

"I would have never had it in the house if I had known the dangers," Lussier said.

Lussier said she's not a scientist or a veterinarian, but she's had dogs her whole life.

"I didn't need a degree to trust Hershey, until it killed my dog," she said. "Corporations have a requirement to warn you of dangers associated with their products. I always considered Hershey to be the Walter Cronkite of candies. You trust them."

Bennett went on to ask Lussier where she came up with the $15,000 in damages, and she explained $1,500 for veterinarian costs, around $800 for the cost of the dog and additional care was about $800. The rest, she said, is for pain and suffering, which is incalculable.

Lussier provided the court with receipts from the veterinarian, but Bennett argued that without the veterinarian's presence in court, the documents amounted to nothing more than hearsay.

The court appearance didn't last long. It was slated for a 1 p.m. start, and after listening to the 30 minutes of testimony and 10 minutes of closing arguments, everyone was on the road 45 minutes later.

Hearing the case was Judge William Wood. He said he had 30 days to make a ruling, but, he said, he doubted it would take that long. As of press deadline May 31, the ruling had not been issued.