For some people diarrhea is liquid poo -- the dog can dehydrate fast with liquid poo. Liquid poo is impossible for a dog to control, so keeping a dog as a housepet for a month with liquid poo and doing nothing, no vet seems a bit insane. For other people, diarrhea is mush-poo. Mush-poo is simply ordinary poo with a higher quantity of liquid in it. It is not impossible for a dog to control, and while picking it out of the grass or concrete is more difficult, it is not something you couldn't manage for a while. Mush-poo seems to be a symptom of over-feeding, and of changing kibbles.
I think most of us, when we change kibbles, if the poo becomes a bit mushy, we do not rush to the vet. Or at least I don't. In fact, diarrhea here gets the following treatment:
1. 24 hour fast
2. 1/2 kibble, 2x first day.
If poo comes out good, end, else go to 3.
3. add 1 tablespoon pumpkin to 1/3 kibble, 2x next two days.
If poo comes out good go to 4. else go to 5.
4. increase food until calorie of old food and new food are similar, if kibble remains good, done.
5. call vet and get the dosage and type of diarrhea meds.
If that doesn't work in a day, then off to the vet.
So I might be a couple of days before actually seeking veterinary care for diarrhea, but usually it clears right up. The only reason I put step five in there, is because I have had a vet prescribe pepto bismal for a dog, and another tell me to use kaopeptate. Usually I don't have to do pumpkin. Usually the 24 hour fast works, and going back on the kibble is fine.
So maybe this was mush-poo which can be more of a chronic issue, and it can definitely be related to a change in kibble.
Now, as I understand it, the whole reason we pay for an office exam when we get shots, is that the dog is supposed to be healthy before getting shots. The vet is supposed to give the dog an examination, else they should not vaccinate the dog. In that respect, maybe the woman has a point. They should not have vaccinated for anything, including rabies when the dog was not well.
But it should not be a 25k point, whether or not it is doable for the vet/clinic.
The dog was 11. Renal failure really isn't that out of the question for an old dog. Pumping vaccinations into a dog experiencing renal failure probably wouldn't help. In fact, the vaccinations in the old and sick dog probably did hasten the inevitable. That's sad. It's awful. I am sure the owner feels terrible.
But if you offered me 25k to inject any of my dogs with something that would cause renal failure, I would tell you to go shove your head in the toilet. 25k will not bring the dog back. It will not make the dog's demise less grusome. It will not change any of the facts in the case. If you cared about your dog, it will not alleviate the pain and suffering of having lost you elderly dog that didn't probably have much longer to live in any case, but who can tell?
It sounds more like the woman is looking for punitive damages. The vet did something grossly wrong and she wants to punish him so that he will think twice before he vaccinates another ill dog, or tries to vaccinate a dog differently from its owner's wishes.