10-16-07 DeGeneres dog situation - Private organization takes dog away from new owners without proof of misconduct

[dmcowen674]

No one posted about this?

I can see the organization having a beef with Degeneres and forbiding her to adopt from them again but the organiztion went to the house where the dog went and they forcibly removed the dog?

Unless they had any evidence the dog was being mistreated I don't see how a private organiztion has this kind of power.

10-16-2007 DeGeneres under fire for giving away dog

Ellen DeGeneres is in the doghouse with a pet rescue agency after giving a pooch away to her hairdresser because it didn't get along with her cats.

In doing so, DeGeneres violated an agreement with the Mutts and Moms dog rescue agency by not informing them of the handoff.

When the agency called DeGeneres to ask about Iggy, she said she found another home for the dog. The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

Mutts and Moms, a volunteer nonprofit organization in Pasadena, does not have a listed phone number and didn't immediately respond to an e-mail request for comment.

 

[Agentbolt]

It says she violated some kind of contract. I'm sure the clause stated that if she did that, ownership of the dog would revert back to them.

 

[waggy]

I think its a rotten move from the organization. it was in a happy healthy home.

but DeGeneres signed a contract saying she won't do what she did.


but it was a dumb move on the orginizations part. all the negitive publicyt and backlash is going to hurt them.

 

[KK]

I like how these rescue shelter things do everything to keep the mutts out of homes that'll take a animal.

 

[FoBoT]

PETA should fire bomb her house
what a pathetic loser Ellen is, doesn't care about the poor doggy

 

[Linflas]

You sign a contract saying that you will give the animal back to them if you can't keep it. Giving it to a third party violates that contract. The reason they have you sign these contracts is to prevent unscrupulous people from adopting the animals and reselling them to labs etc.

 

[Dirigible]

Sounds like the contract was between the organization and Degeneres, and that the hairdresser was not a party. It is unlikely the organization had the right to take away the dog from the hairdresser. Their only recourse would be against Degeneres. (I didn't click the link.)

 

[Agentbolt]

It is unlikely the organization had the right to take away the dog from the hairdresser.

Of course they did. The dog never belonged to the hairdresser, because according to the contract as soon as Ellen tried to ditch the dog it became the organization's dog again. Armchair lawyerin' is tough when you don't know the law, I know, so just trust me, you're wrong.

 

[grohl]

I think I know why nobody posted about it ... because no one gives a damn.

 

[ballmode]

I don't give a damn, she f'ed up

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Linflas
You sign a contract saying that you will give the animal back to them if you can't keep it. Giving it to a third party violates that contract. The reason they have you sign these contracts is to prevent unscrupulous people from adopting the animals and reselling them to labs etc.

 

[KK]

also I thought she was into cats, not dogs.

 

[HannibalX]

Uhh let me see here:

+Tresspassing
+Theft/Buglary
+Conspiracy to commit theft

Even if a contract was violated it's up to a judge to determine the outcome. They can't just come and take your property - that's against the law.

Had anyone shown up at my door and attempted to take anything from me I would have promptly shot them.

 

[Dirigible]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

It is unlikely the organization had the right to take away the dog from the hairdresser.

Of course they did. The dog never belonged to the hairdresser, because according to the contract as soon as Ellen tried to ditch the dog it became the organization's dog again. Armchair lawyerin' is tough when you don't know the law, I know, so just trust me, you're wrong.

Armchair lawyerin' is easy to get wrong, and no, I don't know contract law well at all. What statute or case law would give the organization the right to take the dog back from the hairdresser? I'm curious.

Seems to me the "became the organization's dog again" is only based on the contract between Degeneres and the organization. If Degeneres didn't give it back she's in violation of the contract, but I don't understand how that affects the hairdresser. Unless this is like stolen property, which remains the property of the original owner even if the thief gives it away or sells it to someone completely innocent. The innocent purchaser in that case can have it taken away.

I also don't understand how the organization had the right to take the dog back. If someone showed up at my door wanting my dog I'd tell them to pound sand. They'd have to get a court order or something.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
Uhh let me see here:

+Tresspassing
+Theft/Buglary
+Conspiracy to commit theft

Even if a contract was violated it's up to a judge to determine the outcome. They can't just come and take your property - that's against the law.

Had anyone shown up at my door and attempted to take anything from me I would have promptly shot them.

So tell me, how does a repo work?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Unless they had any evidence the dog was being mistreated I don't see how a private organiztion has this kind of power.

ever miss a couple of car payments in a row?

 

[mugs]

Are you sure the dog was not destroyed in a 7.0 earthquake? I haven't been following the news, but based on your prediction one MUST have happened on the west coast recently.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
Uhh let me see here:

+Tresspassing
+Theft/Buglary
+Conspiracy to commit theft

Even if a contract was violated it's up to a judge to determine the outcome. They can't just come and take your property - that's against the law.

Had anyone shown up at my door and attempted to take anything from me I would have promptly shot them.

So tell me, how does a repo work?

Repo guys have a dangerous job. Any repo that calls for items inside a property/dwelling will usually require a court order and a police escort.

 

[Agentbolt]

Armchair lawyerin' is easy to get wrong, and no, I don't know contract law well at all. What statute or case law would give the organization the right to take the dog back from the hairdresser? I'm curious.

Dude, seriously, every single contract statute ever. The hairdresser never owned the dog. It didn't belong to Ellen anymore because she broke the contract. If I find a wallet on the floor, and go give it to you, if the owner of said wallet comes demanding his wallet, you have to give it to him. Just because you were given the wallet in good faith doesn't give you any legal rights. It was never your wallet, nor mine to give.

I also don't understand how the organization had the right to take the dog back. If someone showed up at my door wanting my dog I'd tell them to pound sand. They'd have to get a court order or something.

Well they can't like rip it out of your hands or bust down your door to get the dog back, but they are perfectly within their rights to ASK for it back. If you refuse, technically you're in the wrong, and they'd have to get a court order to forcibly remove the dog from your posession. They would get said court order without a problem because it IS their dog, they just need official permission to force you to give it up, because private citizens don't by default have that right.

 

[Agentbolt]

Repo guys have a dangerous job.

Exactly, repo guys have a dangerous job because of guys like you who somehow convince themselves they are allowed to keep property that's not theirs. The repo guys are perfectly legally justified in attempting to take your stuff, that simply doesn't stop morons from attempting to prevent them to do so.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Linflas
You sign a contract saying that you will give the animal back to them if you can't keep it. Giving it to a third party violates that contract. The reason they have you sign these contracts is to prevent unscrupulous people from adopting the animals and reselling them to labs etc.

The labs can't buy up strays? Or just save themselves the PR nightmare and breed their own test animals?

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

Repo guys have a dangerous job.

Exactly, repo guys have a dangerous job because of guys like you who somehow convince themselves they are allowed to keep property that's not theirs. The repo guys are perfectly legally justified in attempting to take your stuff, that simply doesn't stop morons from attempting to prevent them to do so.

I don't have much respect for either side of that deal...the repo people are usually legalistic Nazis, and the people who get stuff repossessed are usually irresponsible scumbags. Dirty business all around.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: Pale Rider

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
Uhh let me see here:

+Tresspassing
+Theft/Buglary
+Conspiracy to commit theft

Even if a contract was violated it's up to a judge to determine the outcome. They can't just come and take your property - that's against the law.

Had anyone shown up at my door and attempted to take anything from me I would have promptly shot them.

So tell me, how does a repo work?

Repo guys have a dangerous job. Any repo that calls for items inside a property/dwelling will usually require a court order and a police escort.

So each repo requires a court order?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Linflas
You sign a contract saying that you will give the animal back to them if you can't keep it. Giving it to a third party violates that contract. The reason they have you sign these contracts is to prevent unscrupulous people from adopting the animals and reselling them to labs etc.

The labs can't buy up strays? Or just save themselves the PR nightmare and breed their own test animals?.

Labs won't buy the dog but it stops the dog from being own'd by someone not approved by the rescue organization. For example, I'm rejected by the rescue org b/c my landlord won't allow pets. I can just ask a friend who can to adopt the dog and give it to me. These contracts prevent stuff such an example.

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

Repo guys have a dangerous job.

Exactly, repo guys have a dangerous job because of guys like you who somehow convince themselves they are allowed to keep property that's not theirs. The repo guys are perfectly legally justified in attempting to take your stuff, that simply doesn't stop morons from attempting to prevent them to do so.

Interesting, because what Pale Rider describes is basically the law in Texas. See breach of peace.

 

[Dirigible]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

Armchair lawyerin' is easy to get wrong, and no, I don't know contract law well at all. What statute or case law would give the organization the right to take the dog back from the hairdresser? I'm curious.

Dude, seriously, every single contract statute ever.

See, this is the statute I'd like to see. You mention it, but you haven't produced it. I'm not saying it's not true, I'm just interested in seeing the law. Because without the law, there's a argument to be made that the hairdresser can keep the dog. And there's gotta be a law that overcomes that argument, or the argument could very well win.

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
The hairdresser never owned the dog. It didn't belong to Ellen anymore because she broke the contract. If I find a wallet on the floor, and go give it to you, if the owner of said wallet comes demanding his wallet, you have to give it to him. Just because you were given the wallet in good faith doesn't give you any legal rights. It was never your wallet, nor mine to give.

The wallet example is different. There is no agreement between the owner and the person who finds it, so there is no contract question at all. It's like the theft example. In the dog case, Degeneres did own the dog.

The repo example is interesting as well, but again, if you borrow money, you don't own the car - the bank does. Degeneres did own the dog.