REGISTRY, Breed & kennel Club NEWS

AKC PAYS THE PRICE???
The "Bedlington Suit"

Dateline June 5, 2002  All other publications have been silent on this incredible and credible suit, not for lack of merit but because it is the proverbial “hot potato.” No matter which hand we hold it in; we are all going to get burned. The way AKC mishandled the original situation, the subsequent complaint, its refusal to reverse or rectify based on Ms. Weiskopf’s victory in the NY Supreme Court, the cover-up itself, and the impending court decision affects every single person in the sport today.

The court will hear AKC’s Motion To Dismiss the multi-million dollar suit on June 5th, probably as you read this.  TheDogPlace decided to break the story because you have a right to know. One of the tools most frequently used to suppress information detrimental to AKC is to call the whistle blower an AKC basher. With a long, ongoing, and highly successful background as a breeder, Ms. Weiskopf does not fit that profile. She feels that fanciers need to know how to protect themselves from such a tangled web. Our editor shared her belief that others who might find themselves in this sort of position can benefit from knowing of her attempts to remedy this tragic situation.  

The implications and ramifications of “the Bedlington case” cannot be overlooked by any cognizant person. As the most timely and comprehensive information source in the sport, TheDogPlace is compelled to present the case that has already precipitated rule changes and that will continue to affect our dealings with each other and with AKC. Co-ownership policies are still changing. It would also appear more than coincidental that the May Board opened the door for hardship exemptions for innocent buyers – and for people caught up in a situation like Joan’s.

DEFINITELY NOT HO-HUM, not the normal doggy-dispute. This case has probably gone further than any case in AKC history. The right and the wrong of it will be decided by the courts but we can all learn from this owner’s agonizing experience. Many of the AKC principals have changed, records have been lost (or sealed) and the wheels of justice grind slowly but Joan lives with heartache every day. The story is still unfolding, it is not pleasant, and as the facts come out, it will be easy to understand why it has been suppressed. This editor is reminded of a similar situation when one top AKC judge refused to be shut up when the Shetland Sheepdog registry was so badly corrupted. Her persistence on behalf of the gene bank brought about much needed clean up and change. There have been others but perhaps none so strong as Joan Weiskopf who is twenty-six million dollars “determined” to expose the hypocrisy and favoritism that seems to worsen with each passing year.

WHY? Joan says “My sole interest in this is to let others know they are not alone. Each one of these dogs matters. Each piece of a pedigree is sacred. In the case of less popular breeds each piece not only matters but is critical to the breed. These dogs are worth fighting for. The registry is worth saving, although now I am not sure it is possible given its present condition. There were more than 5 blue slips for the 5 littermates issued at various points in this ordeal. As a sobering question one might ask, have any ever been canceled?”

We know you will join us in thanking Joan Weiskopf for her unwavering resolve and decision not to be muzzled. This editor has knowledge of similar situations wherein the blue slips or individual registration were not canceled, only “flagged” and the guilty parties allowed to continue on with registration privileges.

TheDogPlace report is based on information provided by Ms. Weiskopf. Bob Slay (AKC V.P. Compliance Operations) and Daisy Okas (AKC Communications) were invited to present reassurance or clarifying information. They  have at this time, “no comment” but as the case develops, we trust that AKC's legal counsel will take the gags off.  The courts will decide the issue but every breeder wants to know that their ownerships are not in jeopardy.  

THE FIRM representing Ms. Weiskopf is one of the most prestigious on the east coast Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein.  The case is file 00-CV-471 (NG) United States District Court Eastern District of New York and it alleges 6 causes of action that include A.) Oppressive exercise of monopolistic power, B.) Tortious interference with potential economic damage, C.) Economic oppression/violation of express rules, and D.) Selective enforcement of rules.

THE CASE IS PREDICATED on the fact that the AKC is NOT a private social group that can exercise rules and policies at will. They are the recognized gate-keepers of an industry without whose "Seal of Approval" one suffers economic disadvantage. There was a Federal Court Ruling (Kansas) to this effect in the J.R. Maike case. For those who have been in the sport long enough to remember the Billy Lyles case, he is alleged to have sued AKC for failure to renew his handler’s license. As always in these matters, lips and records were sealed but the obvious result was that AKC promptly and with much fanfare, quit licensing handlers. It has taken more than twenty-five years for memories to fade and handlers to once again achieve the AKC Seal Of Approval albeit in a somewhat different form.

Peremi is a highly respected name in the breed but the bitch that precipitated the lawsuit is Ch. Nimbleby Persephone CD, known to her many admirers as Mimi. She was on the cover of the AKC Gazette in July 1994. Mimi was also featured in an article on obedience and training while Joan was VP, Show Chair, and Training Director of Port Chester Obedience. Mimi was top producing dam last year and Joan has all of her finished offspring.

Joan explains “The trouble started when the co-owner signed Mimi out of co-ownership and into her sole ownership without my knowledge. I found out when I went to register the first litter of puppies in June 1994. Even after years of incomplete discovery, it is still not perfectly clear how the documents followed in succession so as to accomplish a correct paper trail. It is clear that forgery was committed as per the AKC’s charges. Errors that took place internally were admitted to but never rectified. The internal memos to Board members in attempts to report on the situation were one-sided and sorely lacking in completeness of fact.

DOES ANYONE NOT KNOW of instances where dogs have been falsely registered with forged signatures? TheDogPlace has prior documentation wherein the AKC investigator expressed amazement that the signatures on two litter applications and the blue slips “are not even remotely the same signature! There wasn’t even an attempt to make them all look alike, it appears they were all signed by different people!” The outcome? The registrations on the progeny were “flagged” but the person who forged the owner’s signature on two litters from a spayed bitch still has AKC registration privileges and can simply transfer all of those dogs over to another registry…..

Also documented, a buyer registered a litter in Mexico out of a puppy too young to have produced a litter, then returned the bitch to the breeder as “unsuitable.” The breeder found out that her bloodline was being sold for exorbitant prices south of the border and filed complaints with both the AKC and the FCMAC (Federacion Canofila Mexicana). The Mexican registry faced “magnifico” lawsuits by one of the most politically powerful families in all of Mexico. Thelma von Thaden, then President of FCMAC saw it through despite the risk. The unbelievable but factual result? According to Ms. Von Thaden the wealthy owner lost his privileges in Mexico but even though AKC had been kept well informed, it refused to revoke registration privileges on the grounds there was “no reciprocity” with Mexico! The convicted forger subsequently bought several other AKC dogs and continued to freely exhibit at major shows in the U.S.

There are many such stories so we can appreciate Joan Weiskopf’s frustration. She says “I tried my best in the beginning to be a lady and do things quietly. I did not run my mouth. The AKC did more to expose this than I did. If you look on page 107 of the November 2000 Gazette, you will see me mentioned by name with regard to this case. The information given is flawed, but it is mentioned on the Secretary's page. There had previously been an article in Dog News but I was not mentioned by name.”

QUESTIONS! Is it really about who you are? Will AKC ever step up to the plate like the FCMAC? Will there be change under Ron Menaker’s leadership? How good is your co-ownership contract? Do you think AKC will protect your legal rights? What recourse do you have if you find yourself on the wrong side of an ownership dispute? What if, as recently happened, a handler steals your dog, and conspires with a co-owner or previous owner to forge your name to transfer ownership? What good does it do to go to court? Will AKC honor a legal decision or dig in its heels as happened in the Bedlington case? What if you report a false registration, do you become the bad guy or a hero? Is AKC really trying to clean it up or just window dressing the problem?

The “Bedlington Case” will answer many of those questions.

Part Two unfolds with Federal Court, forgery, AKC errors, etc.

The "Bedlington Suit"

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four

Free DogPress subscription & Dog-e-Book Listing Click Here