Hi all,

I know getting legal advice over the 'Net can be problematic, so standard DISCLAIMERS will apply to any answers to this post, but...

In the eyes of the law, who is the legal owner of a dog?

Just over a year ago, I bought my then longtime girlfriend a Great Swiss Mountain Dog puppy as a gift. The puppy cost $1500. We have since split up, but have (to this point) remained close friends. Lately, however, we are going through a "rough spell" and I just want to make sure I have all my bases covered if the eventual need arises to take the dog back. I don't see it getting to that point, and if it did it would be an ABSOLUTE last resort, but I'm just trying to gather info right now.

Basically, as I said, I purchased the puppy for her as a surprise gift. Even though it was a gift, and I did not expect to be paid for the puppy, she immediately insisted that she would pay me back for the dog. I said okay, we'll just consider me buying him a "loan" then and you can pay me back in the near future. She agreed (a verbal contract?) She has yet to pay me a penny.

When I initially purchased the dog, I picked him up at 8 weeks, then kept him until 12 weeks for imprinting and socialization. I then gave him to her as a gift. The dog lives full-time with her (we do not, and did not, live together.)

The dog is just over 1 year old now and here is where we stand:

ME

1. I paid for the dog in full.
2. I am the only name on the puppy/breeders contract.
3. I am the sole AKC registered owner.
4. I alone have spent a few hundred hours to this point training and socializing the dog (I train him along side my Police Work Dog/SchH dog for fun 2-3 days per week, in protection, tracking, obedience, herding and draft work and will title him in these various things as time goes by.)
5. I have paid over half the vet bills to this point.
6. I have paid for OFA prelims on hips/elbows.
7. I bathe and groom the dog.

HER

1. The dog lives with her full-time (I occasionally take the dog for 1 or 2 nights per week when she is working)
2. She pays for most of the food costs and has paid for less than half of the vet bills, so far.
3. She has done NO training/socialization other than basic social interaction with people when she is out.
4. She has allowed him to become involved in 2-3 "scuffles" with other dogs (not his fault), the last of which caused some minor injuries to him and resulted in a 10 day quarantine of him by Animal Control (I was NOT happy.)

So if it came down to it, would I be justified (in the eyes of the law) to simply tell her, "I'm the legal owner of the dog and I'm taking him back?"

Comments???

This is a toughie. While my experience was not like yours, it shows it's hard to "get custody" of dogs that are adequately housed by somebody else. And courts dont' necessarily view "value" and ownership on dogs like you'd expect them too.

In our state I ran into a situation where a woman who rescued some dogs from a group I was associated with had munchhausens by proxie. They tried to get the dogs back (they were routinely being presented at the vet collage with narrow escapes from *name any nasty thing*).

Basically about they only thing they could do was try to prove abuse, and get county animal control to seize the dogs. Since the dogs were "getting care", they were reluctant to step in.

When my ex and I divorced, the ex got the dogs -- by mutual consent. A couple things came up in court, though, when we were establishing estate value of the dogs.

AKC registration isn't proof of ownership, since you buy a number from the AKC, not a dog.

You must be able to positively id each dog, because in the court's eyes, one black and tan dog is very like another. If there is a reasonable doubt of the dog's id, the physical owner (posessor) of the dog has the advantage.

And, when doing estate valuations, the worth of the dog is not extablished by it's purchase price, or what you put into the dog financially, but by the "fair market value" of a similar animal. In the case of my greyhounds, it was based on their track winnings, in the case of the dobies (who have great pedigrees, and are highly trained), it was the worth of any old dobie in the local newspaper. That was the court's wisdom, not ours, and not easy to refute (of course, depends on the judge). I guess this is really common. If the dog's been bred, the valuation of the progeny and estimated number over a lifetime can bring the dog's value up considerably. Stoopid, but that's they way they work around here.

Good luck and hope it works out in the dog's best interest. I can tell ya' the court is not interested in that, only in the value of it, and typically they don't view a dog's value as very much unless it's a working guide or psd, or something similar.

I'd make sure you have him chipped or tatooed at least and if you get into a hassle, make sure your investment in the dog isn't balanced off against breed rescue placing "similar" dogs for $100 plus shipping <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

duh, that's munchhausens by proxy and college

I think what you'll find, you admit to purchasing with the intent to give as a gift, and you gave the dog as a gift. It's doubtful you'll find any relief in court.

I'm just a cop by training and not an attorney, by the grace of God.

DFrost

The dog was microchipped at birth by the breeder, so positive ID is not a problem.

EVERY document (legal or otherwise) solely lists my name as the owner (breeders contract, microchip, AKC registration, USA registration, Great Swiss Mountain Dog Club of America registration, etc.)

I can document the hundreds of training hours I have put into the dog (and what dogs of similar training are worth.) I can document the vet bills and training equipment/toys/kennels I have paid for.

In every way, shape and form, I am the dogs owner and handler. Except for two things: 1. I bought the dog as a gift for her, and 2. the dog lives with her.

Since we were never married (and thus, not divorced) and because of all of the documentation I can provide, I believe I would have a strong case if it ever got to that point. However, the "possession is 9/10's of the law" thing has me concerned.

And again, I want to emphasis, this is VERY preliminary. We're just having a difficult time right now and I want to make sure I know what to expect IF it ever gets to that point. If it comes down to a big fight, etc, I'll do what's best for the dog and probably let her keep him (she's a good mom for the most part, just still learning) then simply go to court to recover the initial purchase costs. I hope it NEVER gets to that point, because that would mean the end for our relationship in any way, shape or form, which I do not want.

Thanks for the continuing info.

3 things actually, you bought it as a gift, AND gave it to her as a gift. Unless you change your story about it being a gift, what's done is done. JMO.

DFrost

Very true, David. However, I don't believe that can be the sole determining factor here.

Remember, even though I initially purchased the dog (and presented it) as a gift, her INSISTENCE, and our subsequent agreement, that she pay me for the dog (which in effect, is a verbal contract, to which there are witnesses) is what led me to retain sole registration, etc, and to NOT register the dog with her as the owner.

If I buy a new car, register and title it in my name only, then give it to you as a gift, I don't believe that alone makes you the owner, unless you have a financial stake in the car. The court may award you custody of the car because you have been the one to possess it, but I would think they would make you pay me fair market value for the car, at least.

First of all, I am not an attorney. Secondly, from what you have written, you probably deserve the dog.

However, legally, if she wants the dog you are, in all likelihood, out of luck.

In most jurisdictions, the statute of frauds would bar you from attempting to enforce her oral agreement with you. That agreement would have constituted a transaction in goods with a value over $500 and such an agreement is voidable by the party against whom you seek to enforce it absent her signature on a written memorandum.

Moreover, she has been spending money to house and feed the dog. She is doing this with the reasonable expectation that the dog is hers. You gave it to her as a gift, after all. She acted in reliance on your promise (that it was a gift) and, in all likelihood, she would be legally entitled to the dog.

The law does not generally allow you to tell someone you are giving them a gift, have them spend money on the maintenance of that gift, and then allow you to take it back by saying it was not really a gift but rather a purchase by that individual for which you made them a loan.

Again, I am not an attorney. You might get lucky.

Hi,

I'm not an attorney either, but I have a friend who knew someone in roughly the same situation that you are in. You bought the dog with the intention of giving it as a gift (which you did) and the dog lives with her. The dog is probably going to be legally hers.

So, why are you considering taking the dog back from her? Is she abusing it? Or are you trying to "get back at her" for not being your girlfriend? It was a gift.