Plaintiffs Kathryn and Jeremy Medlen owned a dog named Avery. The plaintiffs' pet escaped from the backyard and was obtained by the County's animal control agency. When the plaintiffs went to pick up their pet from the animal control shelter they did not have sufficient funds for the required pickup fee. The shelter held the plaintiffs' pet until the plaintiffs had the funds for pickup. The pet was then mistakenly placed on the shelter's euthanasia list, and was put to sleep. Plaintiffs sued the employee of the shelter for causing the pet's death and sought "sentimental or intrinsic value damages." The trial court dismissed the suit, and the plaintiffs appealed. The court of appeals reversed the trial court's decision, finding that pets were property in the eyes of the law. The employee of the shelter appealed this decision. How do you think the Supreme Court of Texas ruled? Why? Strickland v. Medlen, 397 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. 2013).