Andrea Rosebrock 
Well, I can’t say that I’m surprised, except maybe that it took this long for some animal welfare groups to file a suit over the disposition of Helmsley’s billions. Looks like the lineup right now is, not surprisingly, the HSUS, as well as the ASPCA and Maddie’s Fund.
The three groups filed suit Monday in Manhattan Surrogate’s Court claiming that the trustees of Leona Helmsley’s estate/trust have shown “disdain” for Helmsley’s last wishes and want the court to throw out a judge’s February decision that gave the trustees for the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust sole authority to determine which charities would benefit from her estate.
In 2004 Helmsley revised the mission statement of the Trust that ordered that the money should be used for “purposes related to the provision of care for dogs.” Prior to the revision the statement mandated that the money would provide health care for the poor, with an emphasis on children. The Trust is estimated to be in the 5-8 billion dollar range.
In April when the trustees started disbursing some of the monies, only a small bite went to the dogs; $136 million went to hospitals, foundations and the homeless and only a million went to any dog related agencies; $100,000 to the ASPCA and $900,000 to a guide dog group.
The trust, in a statement posted on its Web site, said Helmsley never wanted her fortune just to go to dogs.
“Did Leona Helmsley intend for this charitable trust to focus on the care and help of dogs, rather than people? Absolutely not,” the statement said.
I think it’s a damn shame that the courts and family have decided that now that the “Queen of Mean” is gone, they should be able to completely disregard her last wishes and do what they want with the monies she left.
Take her bequest to her little dog, Trouble; she left a $12 million bequest for the dog and a Judge decided to knock it down to $2 million. Now, I’m not saying that a dog will ever need $12 million dollars but it was her money to do with as she chose, what give anyone the right to change that?
Or how about the fact that she specifically disinherited two family members and a judge decided to say the hell with that and give them, I think, about $6 mil each!
And now this!! Although I do understand that a “Mission Statement” is not necessarily a legally binding document, it is something that shold be taken seriously and with grave considerations. I’m not saying that all her billions should “go to the dogs” but it’s obvious that she had a deep and sincere caring for dogs and their welfare and when we’re talking billions, one million is just a drop in the bucket!
Sure, the money, whatever is going to be left when they take out their fees and whatever, is going to go to good causes, but I really would have liked to see a bit more spared for what Leona Helmsley wanted it to be. What good is a will anyway if a court is just going to decide whatever it wants to decide, completely disregarding the “dearly departed’s” last wishes?
Personally I’d like to see some of the money get into the hands of some of the local rescues and shelters that stuggle desperately and actualyl do for the dog and pets rather than into the hands of some big “animal welfare” group that actualyl does little “hands on” when it comes to animal welfare and that has millions and millions already squirreled away but I guess they are the only one with the financial backing to actually bring the suit to court. Still, I’m not going to hold my breath that the dog are going to get any more than they’ve gotten or have been slated to get.
I hope they succeed in getting at least some of the money and then it would be a brilliant gesture on the part of the three groups to share the wealth with those smaller organizations that really do the difficult, hands-on work such as Best Friends
I said it before and I’ll say it again, the handlers of this estate are risking a wrath stronger than GOD. They’re messin with the Queen of Mean. I wouldn’t wish that Karma on my worst enemy. (OK, maybe I would in certain cases….)
OOOO….don’t EVEN get me started on THIS 1!!!! makes u feel it’s kinda DAFT 2 make out a will…why even bother if somebody can decide where u’r $$$$ is gonna go….not that i really have any $$$$$$ 2 leave~but that’s NOT the point, eh?
have a great day, all.
When I saw this in an email from rescue that I had gotten, it made me mad as hell. A trustee of a trust is supposed to follow the wishes of the deceased, whether or not it is to their personal liking. The fact that a judge took total disregard for her trust befuddles me. Like dru said, why even bother anymore if no one is going to follow the wishes of the deceased. Ms Hemsley did want the monies to go to more hands on people – because she must have known what “the little guys”, ie rescues and no kill shelters, go thru to get funds. The word trustee speaks volumes. She appointed these “trustees” because she had faith and trust in them that they would follow thru on her wishes. I agree that 12 million for her dog is a bit excessive, but then we are not getting all the “fine print” of the trust. Maybe she had directives in her trust as to how far the trustees were to go with Troubles health care. Those points we will never know, but for a Judge, who is to oversee, and not superceed over the wishes in a trust makes me so mad with our judicial system.
As far as HUSU and ASPCA go trying to get monies from her estate, they could both take a flying leap. Maybe if the big ceo’s of both these places would cut their own personal fat paychecks, maybe something would be left for the actual animals they are allegedly helping.
The ASPCA is not like that. Stop insulting them.
MM, that is my opinion. I am not insulting them. I am entitled to my own opinion of any subject discussed here.
My opinion too Susie, not as bad but still more about PR and war chests for themselves. As D says, it would be the better thing if the monies went to smaller groups that were “in the trenches” 24/7 to actually save, rather than talk about it. If any of the Big Groups had true integrity, rather than being more concerned about being PC and not “upsetting the HSUS” they would be pointing fingers loud and long of the HSUS support and use of VICK.
Judge and trustee just go to show that “money will buy anything with some people, even honor and integrity”. Queen of Mean or not, it was her money, she was in her right mind, no one should be able to change her wishes. Too bad, she did not disperse most of it while she was still alive, that would have taken care of the bloodsuckers.
MM maybe you should reconsider the Human Society and ASPCA. They can print out all the fancy brochures they want to sell anything. They have the money. I always thought the Humane Society was good too, but I have been reading more and more horror stories about them. Sure they send out calendars, address labels and so on. Who needs it? They could use that money on helping an animal. It is GREED I tell you GREED. It’s like the United Way. In order for them to help you, you have to be penniless. Please wake up and start taking care of rescues and shelters.
Well said MOEGO1! There are some people who understand and then there are those that don’t. You understand.
ok. I heard a little about this situation and i am disgusted that a person’s last will and testament means not worth a hill of beans. No matter what the persons last wishes are they need to be respected. What the heck is this saying about wills and judges…little I think. Makes me think twice about where my dollars are going to go.
Oh! I know where they will be going..to the dogs and not to HSUS that is, but to those that really make a difference.
Thank you Kit! Although none of us are financially rich, we are rich with the fact that we give a damn about others, meaning the animals, and the fact that we dedicate our lives to helping save these poor homeless babies, some of which have been thru the most horrible lives thru abuse, dog fighting, neglect, they do appreciate every little thing we do do for them.
Just because one person’s priorities are not the same as another’s does not automatically negate the validity of former individual’s priorities even if that person’s priorities are not “the norm.” Lets say you had an fondness for children and you chose to leave your full estate to children’s hospitals. Wouldn’t it would be deplorable if your executors decided to give it to dog charities instead? Well it is the same thing here only children’s hospitals just happen to have more supporters situations like this are more common where the decietful executors are applauded for following the popular vote and not necessarily the vote of the person who’s choice is the only one that should matter, the donor!
I wanted to point out that not one of the three groups is saying the money should go to them – just that it go to the welfare of dogs. Said best by Wayne on his blog,
“…we’re not arguing that the money should come to our own groups, although we’d be pleased to put some of it to work in our campaigns to stop puppy mills, dogfighting, and pet overpopulation. We’re hoping the majority of the funds will go to animal shelters and rescue groups around the world, to support their much-needed work to help dogs. Grant-making should be done in a way that is consistent with the terms set by Mrs. Helmsley—to honor the fact that she wanted her own money to be used for dogs.”
Once again 22 year old SarahHSUS earns her salary by coming to the defense of Pacelle and the HSUS. She was recently hired largely to monitor and defuse online criticism of her employers. She even had the audacity to harass Nathan Winograd on Twitter. Other paid online defenders tend to shut up after their arguments are debunked by those in the know but not Sarah. She will parrot Wayne’s bogus claims, link to his hilariously self-glorifying blog and vilify anyone who disagrees. Worse than SarahB is the HSUS legal hit team. It routinely threatens and often files multi-million dollar SLAPP/
defamation lawsuits to punish and intimidate those who speak out. As far as the Helmsley mess, I suspect the trustees and spokesman for the estate are aware of the Humane Society’s long history of financial mismanagement and corrupt leadership. Thanks to the internet – and despite Pacelle’s thuggish efforts to control its content – thousands of people know about it as well.