While my tongue was firmly in cheek, my point was that just because something is written down and signed doesn’t mean it’s enforceable. Now that it comes out that Mutts&Moms had screwed up it’s incorporation status, I think reality proved my point better than the South Park scenario.
Seems this isn’t the first time Ellen took in a dog that was ostensibly meant for her only for it to be passed on to someone else.
Huh?
It was just on “Inside Edition”. A woman was introduced to Ellen through a mutual friend, went to the set of her show to present her with a dog. Called Ellen later to see how the dog was doing and found that the dog, which had been expected to be in Ellen’s home, ended up in a home belonging to one of Ellen’s staff.
Ah, ok, so re-gifting the dog so to speak. Giving the dog away doesn’t seem so bad, depending on the circumstances, like if Ellen tried to keep the dog but it wasn’t working out. However, if she took the sog with no intention of keeping that kinda sucks. Either way she should have probably run the idea by the woman that she wanted someone else to have the dog. If it went to a good home I can’t see how someone would object to that.
What’s kind of crazy is that Ellen is an animal lover, it is undeniable. She is actually on the board of a pet rescue and frequently works on their behalf. If this woman with Mutts and Moms had any savvy at all she would have used that to her advantage. I bet she could have “blackmailed” Ellen simply by saying, “well you broke our rules. Tell you what, the family can keep the dog if you make an appearance at such and such fundraising event.” Ellen wouldn’t object, since she is already happy to do something for animals, the woman would get some positive publicity and the dog would get to stay in the home. It could have ended so much better for everyone.