Helmsley Leaves Billions For Dog Foundation In Her Will
 

Helmsley Left Dogs Billions in Her Will

By STEPHANIE STROM

Sure, the hotelier and real estate magnate Leona Helmsley left $12 million in her will to her dog, Trouble. But that, it turns out, is nothing much compared with what other dogs may receive from the charitable trust of Mrs. Helmsley, who died last August.

Her instructions, specified in a two-page “mission statement,” are that the entire trust, valued at $5 billion to $8 billion and amounting to virtually all her estate, be used for the care and welfare of dogs, according to two people who have seen the document and who described it on condition of anonymity.

It is by no means clear, however, that all the money will go to dogs. Another provision of the mission statement says Mrs. Helmsley’s trustees may use their discretion in distributing the money, and some lawyers say the statement may not mean much anyway, given that its directions were not incorporated into Mrs. Helmsley’s will or the trust documents.

“The statement is an expression of her wishes that is not necessarily legally binding,” said William Josephson, a lawyer who was the chief of the Charities Bureau in the New York State attorney general’s office from 1999 to 2004.

Still, longstanding laws favor adherence to a donor’s intent, and the mission statement is the only clear expression of Mrs. Helmsley’s charitable intentions. That will make the document difficult for her trustees, as well as the probate court and state charity regulators, to ignore.

The two people who described the statement said Mrs. Helmsley signed it in 2003 to establish goals for the multibillion-dollar trust that would disburse assets after her death.

The first goal was to help indigent people, the second to provide for the care and welfare of dogs. A year later, they said, she deleted the first goal.

Howard J. Rubenstein, a spokesman for the executors of Mrs. Helmsley’s estate, said they did not want to comment on the statement because they were still working to determine the trust’s direction.

Mrs. Helmsley, the widow of Harry B. Helmsley, who built a real estate empire in Manhattan, was best known for her sharp tongue and impatience with humanity. She became a household name when she was featured in glossy advertisements for the Helmsley hotels. “It’s the only palace in the world where the queen stands guard,” advertisements for the Helmsley Palace proclaimed.

But for many Americans, she later became a symbol of unbridled arrogance and belief in entitlement, particularly after she was convicted in 1989 of $1.2 million in federal income tax evasion, for which she was sent to prison. She was the subject of a 1990 television film, “Leona Helmsley: The Queen of Mean,” with Suzanne Pleshette in the title role, and at least three books.

When she died last year at 87, she left all but a few million dollars of her vast estate to what will become one of the nation’s dozen largest foundations when the probate process is finished. She had $2.3 billion in liquid assets when she died, according to the probate petition, and the disposal of her real estate holdings is expected to produce an additional $3 billion to $6 billion.

Even if the resulting total is at the low end of the estimate — $5 billion or so — the trust will be worth almost 10 times the combined assets of all 7,381 animal-related nonprofit groups reporting to the Internal Revenue Service in 2005.

The five executors of her will — Mrs. Helmsley’s brother, Alvin Rosenthal; two of her grandsons, Walter and David Panzirer; her lawyer, Sandor Frankel; and her longtime friend John Codey — have been preoccupied with disposing of the real estate.

They are also the trustees of the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust and, according to the two people who discussed the mission statement, have fretted about the public outcry that disclosure of its terms might incite.

They have reason for concern: News last year that the biggest named beneficiary in Mrs. Helmsley’s will was Trouble, her Maltese, led to death threats against the dog, which now requires security costing $100,000 a year. But they also cannot sit on the liquid assets much longer without raising questions from the attorney general’s office, which oversees the use of charitable assets in New York State.

The trustees recently hired a philanthropic advisory service to help them figure out a way to remain true to Mrs. Helmsley’s intentions while at the same time pursuing broader charitable goals with her foundation.

Judge Renee R. Roth of Surrogate’s Court in Manhattan will also play a role. She has already demonstrated a willingness to be flexible, cutting the size of Trouble’s trust fund to $2 million, from the $12 million prescribed in Mrs. Helmsley’s will, and ordering that the difference be added to the pending charitable trust.

Judge Roth also agreed to a settlement between the trustees and two of Mrs. Helmsley’s grandchildren who were explicitly left out of her will. The agreement gave those grandchildren $6 million.

There are many ways the trustees could spend the Helmsley money on dogs. National groups like the Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have programs dedicated to dogs, and many smaller local groups rescue abandoned and abused dogs.

Or the trustees could use the trust’s money to finance veterinary schools or research on canine diseases.

Her goal of helping dogs was not Mrs. Helmsley’s only posthumous quirk. In her will, she ordered that her tomb, in Sleepy Hollow Cemetery in Sleepy Hollow, N.Y., be “acid-washed or steam-cleaned” once a year.
She also made two grandchildren’s combined $10 million inheritance contingent on their visiting their father’s grave, requiring that a registration book be placed in the mausoleum to prove that they had shown up.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us...=1&oref=slogin

amazing.....

I hope it doesn't go to the HSUS!

Her death creates some issues, not merely about the cause of her death but as well as over tax bite. Trouble was given $2 million when Helmsley perished in 2007. Here is the proof: Leona Helmsley’s millionaire pooch Trouble dies, newstype.com.

http://www.pitbull-chat.com/images/smilies/no2.gif. I'm all for helping animals,but that is quite sickening.Two million dollars to a fucking dog.That could feed so many kids or buy life saving drugs for people who are sick but just can't afford treatment. The old bitch didn't like humanity so she leaves obscene amounts of money to some dogs.Nice hypocrisy you old hag.In your attempt to show your disgust and contempt for human kind,you become the very epitome of that which you profess to loathe.

Apparently the dog died on December 13, 2010...though it was not made public till last Thursday.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...WIRE/110609563

lol they probably killed it

andd i agree Cloe its stupid to leave that much to a dogs. even billions to dogs, when the majority of that money will NOT being going to the animals anyway.

Wasnt this posted like last week???

While I agree that the stupid old hag was a total idiot for leaving the money to the dog, I am also enraged that the courts didn't actually award the dog all the money. What, so just because you don't like what I do with my money, you get to decide for yourself whether to follow my damn will or not? That just ain't right! I don't care if the old fool left all her money to the "Support Dog-Killing Rapist Pedophile Cannibals" Fund!

I agree with you on that.. so no ones will is set in stone anymore I guess.. which is ridiculous.. http://www.pitbull-chat.com/images/smilies/no2.gif

Very true... it actually happens more than we notice though smh

That's just....wow. I like how they started adding people to the will that weren't on it, as well. Maybe there was a reason that the two grandchildren weren't on it to begin with. What gives them the right to mess with her will after she dies? I don't care if she was a bitter old hag. If she wanted her money to go to her dog, and homeless dogs that's where it should go to. The only reason a judge and lawyers should be going over it is to figure out which organizations/rescues the money is going to.

I really hope that HSUS, or PETA don't get the money http://www.pitbull-chat.com/images/smilies/frown.png

I agree with what Cliff said about them disregarding her will, that is pretty f-d up - even if she was batshit insane her last will and testament should be followed.

However, I have to say what a waste of funds that could have helped so many humans - I wonder why she decided to remove helping humans as one of her goals from her original will.... sounds like she had a bad experience with someone and made the rest of folks who could have been helped by her will suffer for it.

I'd be pretty embarrassed if she were a family member of mine and seemed to care more about securing the well being of random dogs and cats than securing the well being of the future generations of her own family at the very least. Either her family was really rotten or she was really nuts - either way it is sad.