A Question Of Sanity
Leona Helmsley’s trustees were questioning her sanity when she revised her will in 2004. Requesting a judge to review the revisions leaving $12 million dollars to care for her dogs, while cutting out her two of her grandchildren.
A 2004 revision to the mission statement of the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust ordered that the money should be used for “purposes related to the provision of care for dogs” as well as other charities.
Prior to the will being changed the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust had included money for such causes as health care for the poor, with an emphasis on children.
The Helmsley trustees, who include her brother and two of her four grandchildren, had sought the ruling from Manhattan Surrogate Court Justice Troy Webber after reports that the funds would be applied only to dog-related charities.
In a decision made public Wednesday, a Manhattan judge ruled that the trustees of the Queen of Mean’s estate can spread her estimated $5 billion fortune among charities that benefit more than just man’s best friend.
When Trouble, Helmsley’s Maltese, passes the remaining money will go back to the charitable fund. In the meantime, the dog’s yearly expenses run about $300,000. About $210,000 go to around-the-clock protection.
Okay, leaving $12 million to your dogs may be a bit excessive, but can you imagine all the good the leftover money could have done to help out dog charities. If someone chooses to leave money to their dogs, rather than their grandchildren, does that make them insane? Maybe she received unconditional love from her dogs.
While Leona Helmsley may have been rather eccentric, I think the one sane decision she made was to leave her money to help out dog charities.
* Pic courtesy Graylock/AP
I think that it is great the she is giving money to pet charities but if the dogs care costs $300,000 how much will actually be left… I would also like to know how in the world it could possibly cost that much to give the dog proper care… I think that most sources say that the average dog only costs about $8,000 DURING HIS ENTIRE LIFE!
Hi Hunter..She left $12 million to her dog. So even if the dog lived another 10 years that would only be $3 million, leaving a lot left over.
I’m thinking the around-the-clock protection is so no one kidnaps the dog for ransom. Otherwise, I can’t imagine what they would be protecting him from.
The money that they are spending on one dog per year is crazy, it kills me to think of how many dogs it could be helping.
There are so many animal rescues nation wide who that money would help beyond imagination. Unless you are a part of the animal world of rescue you do not realized how much of a struggle it is to take care of animals be it abandoned, injured, homeless etc. There are all kind of big organizations etc that give to humans like children, elderly etc. But there really are not many big organizations that give to animal rescue. People do not know what even half or 1 percent of 12 million could do for rescues. Rescues could take that and help so many animals who need help. Companion animals like their human counter part are being left homeless as their parents (owners) loose homes and jobs. And there rescues are becoming so full that the chance of a companion animal who becomes homeless will die. While their parents(owners) go on with their life. I think the judge made a bad call on this. It should be up to the deceased to place her millins where it is needed so badly. The governments will come up with ways to save people, but only rescues will come up with ways to save the companion animals, no government will be there to care for them. Just rescues who will pinch every penny they can to save as many as they can, the rest will die.
Calculating it out based on $210K/year for the security, if you have 1 guard at a time, providing 24/7 protection that works out to about $24/hour, which will be about $50K per year for each guard, assuming they work 40 hours per week each. This does not take into account benefits or paid vacation. If they hire off-duty police officers, $24/hour isn’t too shabby for moonlighting. But it doesn’t seem as exhorbitant when you break it down. If the dog were ransomed, that could potentially cost much more, and that would be our money since on-duty police and FBI would be utilized, I’m sure.
I think the family is cruel for changing what her money goes to after she passed. I have heard of this story before and the ruling judge does not know what happened between her and her family before she passed. I feel that animal based charities is a great way to spend the rest of her $12 million dollars. People need to get out of other people’s business. I personally only donate to animal charities, does that make me essentric as well?
Probably one of the problems the court had, was the nebulous nature of the bequest. If only she had specified certain charities by name, maybe it would have held up. But that’s probably too much $ to just turn over to executors to divvy up in some unspecified random manner. Just a guess. You’d think she’d have had better legal advice, with all that $ to buy the best.
I agree about the better legal advice Roxanne.
I think it’s sad there was no one she could trust enough to leave her dog’s care to without that much money (maybe just one million would have covered it, lol). I’m sure more than anything she wanted it to be healthy, happy and living in the style it was used to (wouldn’t any of us want that?).
To me, this is just one more example of species loyalty in that human beings (and court judges) are utterly convinced they have more value than other living creatures.
What is insane, is the concept that human beings have more rights to live on this planet than all other animals.
Why is it deemed more appropriate to give the money to children rather than puppies?
What makes her grandchildren more deserving than her pooch?
Why is giving your fortune to charities that benefit humans more sane than giving it to charities devoted to animals?
It was leona’s money to leave however she desired; why should her wishes be disrespected or tampered with?
Having met this lady, I am reminded once again of the unconditional love dogs offer all humans and trouble certainly earned the dough.
Nina-
I agree with you 100%. I do not feel that it was the judge’s place to be able to cancel out this woman’s wishes after her death. I know in my family, there are only a select few grandchildren that actually care about my grandmother… so I KNOW this happens in other families as well.. People aren’t always good…. I don’t blame her for leaving a chunch of money to her dog and I’m glad it will help out dogs in need. : )