What constitutes dog ownership?

Why is it so hard to define "dog ownership"? (This is long)

A wife & her husband were "given" by wifes sister a puppy to raise & train in SAR (search & rescue).
The SAR non-profit group leader wanted the dog donated to her.

The sister didn't want SAR group leader to have dog, so she gave dog to her sister (the wife). She shipped dog to them, put AKC papers in their name, but did not claim IRS donation because it was her sister and not organization.

For 3 years wife & husband personally trained the dog in SAR group, paid for all county tags,training supplies,food & vet and sheltered & loved the dog.

During this 3 years,SAR group leader never said anything about dogs welfare or questioned ownership, nor contributed any money towards dog or training. Also when dog was certified, certification papers were in husbands name as he trained him.

The SAR group leader decided she didn't like husband & wife in her group and kicked them out after 3 years.The rest of the SAR members thought this was wrong so they all left also.

Now SAR group leader is mad and got a lawyer "pro bono" to sue husband & wife, saying dog was donated to her, and it's her dog and she wants it.(Note: the value of the dog is about $18,000. due to it being trained & certified.)

SAR group leader has no documentation saying she owns dog, nor proof of ever paying a cent towards welfare of dog. But because she is "pro bono" and not paying a dime, she is making husband & wife pay thousands to defend their ownership of dog.She even requested the wifes sister who gave dog to them to show income tax proof that she never claimed the dog as donation. The proof was sent and she never claimed dog as donation on taxes.
SAR group leader never sent her end of year tax deduction form anyway, SAR group leader had to know dog was never donated to them..

Obviously she is now wanting the dog due to it's value.

Why don't states have clear description of what constitutes dog ownership. It would seem if you had dog for 3 years,AKC papers in their name, licenses,pet food receipts,medical & rabies and certificates in your name you trained it...it would clearly be husband & wifes dog.

Surely if SAR owner thought the dog was hers she would have said something in 3 years and contributed to bills and would want certificates in her name, or made a written training agreement.No nothing came up till the husband & wife left the group.

Shouldn't this be a cut & dried decision? All the proof is with the husband & wife. They will be going to court in 2008. In the meantime they have put over $5,000.00 into lawyers fees fighting to keep their dog. It seems as if they are being drug over the coals.Lawyers saying AKC papers in their name means nothing.Then why does AKC hand out papers with names on them???

What constitutes dog ownership?????Seems to me who ever buys county tag is owner and provides for welfare of dog.

Please help me understand how the husband & wife can be ravaged by the legal system when thedog is clearly "owned" by them for 3 years.They are about to mortgage their house to keep the dog they love and raised and trained!

Thanks in advance,
Mary

Once the dog was given, unless there were explicit terms that governed when and how it was to be returned--the dog belongs to those that rec'd it.

The court will agree.

I have a question that sort of deals with something of this sort. At the beginning of the summer (2007) I decided that I wanted to get a small dog to keep me company while I attended university. I planned on getting a pup from a local animal shelter. My boyfriend stated that he did not want me to get a dog there, due to the fact that it might not have gotten his/her shots, and might already be ill... so if the dog would pass away, he would not want to see my heart broken. He then suggested that I should get a dog from a private breeder. I told him that I could not afford a dog that way. He then suggested that he would buy the dog for me, under a verbal agreement that I would take care of him/her (providing a home, food, vet bills, toys, etc.)
A few days later, we drove to meet up with the breeder to pay and pick up the puppy. I was so overwhelmed with seeing the dog, I ran right towards him and would not put him down. The breeder then needed to have paperwork done, since I was so preoccupied with the dog, I told my boyfriend to sign the papers for me. He then signed his own name to the papers. I didn't think this was an issue at first, but he then started saying that the dog was not just "mine" but that it was his also. In other words, he was saying that the dog was now "ours". Again, at first this all seemed fine, but later on throughout the relationship, we [just like any other couple] started disagreeing and realizing that we weren't meant for each other.
What I am asking is, although I have been taking care of the dog since the day he was brought home, as well as paid for the vet bills and food; since the boyfriends name is on the papers and since he paid the $350... if we would break up, does he have rights to take the dog away from me and my family?