Jennifer Aniston and Kris Jenner's Rescue Dogs Dragged Into 'Puppy Laundering' Scandal as L.A. Officials Allege Breeder Animals Were Passed Off as Rescues
The lawsuit says Wagmor bought hundreds, possibly thousands, of puppies from commercial breeders.
Oct. 29 2026, Published 2:41 p.m. ET
The Los Angeles City Attorney's Office has sued Studio City-based Wagmor Pets, its founder Melissa Bacelar and two related businesses, alleging they bought dogs from commercial breeders and puppy mills and sold them to customers as rescued animals.
The civil lawsuit alleges the defendants purchased hundreds, and potentially thousands, of dogs from breeders across the country before marketing them as rescues in California. The allegations have not been proven in court.
Prosecutors claim customers paid adoption fees ranging from $650 to $1,500 while believing they were helping dogs in need. The city alleges the operation instead functioned as an illegal commercial enterprise disguised as an animal rescue.
Lawsuit Alleges Misleading Sales and Donations
Customers allegedly paid $650 to $1,500 per dog, believing they were adopting rescue animals.
The lawsuit names Wagmor Pets, Wylder's Holistic Pet Center Inc. doing business as The Wagmor, Doho House LLC, and Bacelar.
City officials allege the businesses used multiple entities, including a purported nonprofit, to buy and resell commercially bred dogs while circumventing California and Los Angeles animal welfare laws.
The complaint also alleges Wagmor continued to represent itself as a tax-exempt nonprofit and told donors contributions were tax-deductible after the IRS and California Franchise Tax Board revoked its tax-exempt status in May 2025.
Prosecutors further accuse Bacelar of using urgent fundraising appeals, including claims that breeders would kill dogs, to encourage donations.
The city is seeking a permanent injunction, restitution for affected consumers, and more than $7 million in civil penalties.
Celebrities Have Not Been Accused Of Wrongdoing
The city says some dogs had serious health problems and died days or weeks after adoption.
Wagmor became closely associated with Hollywood after Ellen DeGeneres featured the rescue on her talk show in 2019. The organization subsequently found pets for celebrities including Jennifer Aniston, Chrissy Teigen and Kris Jenner.
Aniston publicly described her dog Lord Chesterfield as a rescue after adopting him through Wagmor in 2020, while Teigen and Jenner were also among celebrities who obtained dogs through the organization.
The lawsuit does not accuse any of those celebrities of wrongdoing. The allegations concern Wagmor and its operators, while the city's case raises questions about whether customers were accurately told where their dogs came from.
City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto said families seeking rescue animals "deserve honesty, not deception," accusing the defendants of exploiting consumers' compassion for financial gain.
Complaint Raises Animal Welfare Concerns
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The complaint alleges Wagmor solicited tax-deductible donations after its tax-exempt status was revoked.
The lawsuit also alleges that some dogs sold through Wagmor had serious health problems and that numerous dogs died after being adopted.
"Puppy laundering" refers to obtaining dogs from commercial breeders and presenting them to consumers as rescue animals. The city alleges the practice allowed the defendants to get around restrictions on pet stores selling dogs and laws governing dog brokers.
Prosecutors accuse the defendants of violating California's Unfair Competition Law and the Los Angeles Municipal Code.
Bacelar has denied the allegations. She told TMZ, "The allegations against me are not true. Not some of them. Not most of them. They are not true, and I will prove it."
The case now moves forward as a civil enforcement action, with the city seeking penalties and restrictions that have not yet been ordered by the court.
