Didan Notzach! Court Barrs Krinsky and Shemtov from any Baal'Habitshkeit over the Rebbe's Shull - Congregation Lubavitch Inc.
Click to Download PDF File of Court Decision
in favor of the Shull, Congregation Lubavitch
Click to see Krinsky's FAILED VERSION,
seeking control of the Shull, which the Judge Rejected
(Note Page 10 in the PDF, where Krinsky tried but failed to win Control of the Shull)
Dated June 19th 2006
Judge Ira B. Harkavy ruled as follows:
ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that, neither MERKOS nor AGUDAS may eject Congregation Lubavitch Inc. prior to the granting of an order or judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction permitting such ejectment and it's further
This was a VERY major defeat for Krinsky and Shemtov who were seeking control of the 770 Shull and to eject the Gaboim of the Rebbe's Shull. The Judge also said that the Building Structure belonged to Merkos and Agudas, but that was never in dispute by the Gaboim, since the gaboim never had any interest in the structure except for the Shull where they still continue to maintain Control.
While Krinsky could have rights to the general outside structure to affix his Zaya Plaque on the structure of the building, he will no doubt also be barred from doing so at the entrance to the Shull, when the case will undoubtedly be appealed to a higher court.
DaasHakohol legal analysts pointed out that:
Judge Harkavy decision, totally failed to address the precise location of the Plaque.
Merkos and Aguch ownership of the structure, could give them the right to affix a plaque of their choice at the ENTRANCE to 784-788 (On Top of the Porch - Entrance to Krinsky's Offices) - but NOT at the Entrance to Shull where Judge Harkavy Barred Merkos and Aguch access!
Since the Judge failed to address the precise Location of the Plaque or even if he did their was no basis for the precise location to be at the entrance to the Shull, Rather than at the entrance to Krinsky's Offices - It is therefore, practically certain, that the shull (Congregation Lubavitch) will win this on Appeal.
posted by DaasHakohol @ Thursday, June 22, 2006
42 comments
42 Comments:
Your Analysis of the ruling is way off. The question of CLI's rights as a tenant or lisencee were not presented to the Court so the Court said that until such time as that issue is litigated the status quo shall remain. He passed no judgment of whether Merkos or Aguch could win on an ejection action. Further, your harping on the failure to mention the location for the plaque is stam shtusim. The whole case has been about the plaque at the enterance to the shul. What else would the judge be referring to?
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE
Real Analysis,
Your dead wrong!
True, the whole case has been "about the plaque".
But as the world says: "Af A Klotz Kasha, Chapt Men Zich Nit"
Indeed, BECAUSE it was so obvious, YOU GOOFED in that you failed to address the precise location, of the plaque (rightfully so because you had good reason to GOOF, because you thought it was obvious - truthfully NOT AT ALL SO SIMPLE)
This will be grounds for appeal and we, The Rebbe's Shull and Gaboim, WILL WIN on appeal because you goofed!
In order to win on appeal, it helps a lot if the court decision has major deficiencies and failure to address the precise location of the plaque or any reason why it should be, so to speak "in your face" of the Shull, where Krinsky is barred, virtually guarantees that we will win on appeal.
Real Analysis,
You are also wrong for another reason:
Poshut, Al Pi Sechel Haposhut:
Lets use an example of the Building on the corner of Montgomery and Kingston, owned by the Menude, Fisher:
Fisher, who has title to the building may affix a plaque to the building just as ANY building owner can do whatever he wants.
You would be a total Lunatic, to therefore assume, that THIS give Fisher a Right to remove the Sign of "Kol Tuv", because "he has a right" to put "his own sign" to the outside structure to which he has title!
Even a Child understands as a Davar Haposhut that although Fisher has title to the building, yet KolTuv the Tenant can put his own sign AT THE ENTRANCE TO HIS STORE, as a Tennant.
Same is with 784-788 - Just because, a landlord has title, to a building, he can put his plaques wherever he wants on the outside of the building WITH ONE EXCEPTION - not Right "IN HIS FACE" of the Tennant's DOORWAY! ! !
Every store or Shull who is a Tennant, has right to put it's sign of it's own choice (not the landlords choice) at HIS DOORWAY.
Krinsky too can put his Zaya at his own doorway, at the upstairs entrance to his building offices not at the Shull DOORWAY.
That "entrance to the Shull", has NOTHING to do with the "entrance to the building" as this entrance is for the EXCLUSIVE use of the Shull, where Krisnky has been BARRED by Judge Harkavy.
This analysis must have been done by a law student. He misreads the judges order because of his lack of practical law:
the judge denies Merkos and Aguch the right to eject the gabboim until there is an order to do so. Any storefront lawyer can tell you that all Merkos has to do--any what Justice Harkavy intends so as to be upheld on appeal- is file for eviction. You cannot remove an illegal tenant until you get an eviction notice. After Merkos gets the eviction notice, the Gabboim will have to move out.
All The Lefti's who realize that they lost Big Time here, are "playing" with the concept of "they COULD face eviction".
Krinsky is now a VERY BIG "GIBOR"!
What is his big Gevura?
He can "threaten" Eviction as the Natzi's evicted Yidden from their homes and destroyed Shuls!
I guess Krinsky could have evicted the Rebbe from his room too, (Krinsky could say, the Rebbe was a "squatter") The Rebbe didn't pay rent to Krinsky for use of the room.
It's "so nice" of Krinsky that he didn't EVICT the Rebbe - after all Krinsky "HAD THE RIGHT" to evict the Rebbe, had he wanted to!
That's a LOSERS Line, to save face, for Krinsky to say:
Yes we Lost "BUT" I am "all Powerful" and "I am so mighty" because I "could have" evicted you.
Every Landlord "COULD HAVE" and WOULD HAVE" and "may be able to in the future" evicted anyone he wants.
If that helps him feel "powerful" after he lost in court, let him enjoy himself!
Just imagine how silly it is, for every landlord in CH to come to their Tennant (thousands of us) and tell us:
Ha ha ha ha
"I am more powerful than you..."
"ha ha "I can Evict You"
"....you better behave yourself and "thank me" for not evicting you"
"I am your landlord and I am "SO KIND", that I didn't evict you yet"
Krinsky's eviction "threats", puts the Nazi's to shame!
ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that, pursuant to the decision entered on March 13, 2006, plaintiff MERKOS L'INYONEI CHINUCH, INC. shall have judgment against CONGREGATION LUBAVITCH, INC., declaring that CONGREGATION LUBAVITCH, INC. has no right, title or interest in or to, and is not the owner of premises 784-788 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, New York, and, has no right to exercise any incident of fee title ownership; and it is further...
Read it and weep ....
Ohhh...you just made me "so sad"...I am mamash "weeping" (with joy)
I am "so sad".... that krinsky can hold on to the "Bricks"...and Zaya on the OUTSIDE !
While we Dance with the Rebbe Melech HaMoshiach on the INSIDE of 770 !
What about the Block Party? Are we having one, yes or no?
July Fourth is coming, l'havdil, Gimmel Tammuz is coming, and no preparations have yet been made.
Who will bring the franks, sourcrout, ketchup, soda, fries? And the big boombox speakers - or keyboard.
We can all get along if we have a party together, block by block. We agreed to this a while ago. It's time to stop bickering and prepare the party.
Think about it. Would Moshiach be happier seeing us eating franks together, or suing each other in court?
If Moshiach thinks he's going to come and find us all learning Samech Vov, well sadly, I think that might be a long time in coming. But a block party - that's a possibility! We'll rock, rhumba, roll and rikud together, and - trust me - we'll all be nicer to each other that way.
After all, you don't sue the person you just danced with.
Dovy,
I just love your idea.
It sounds like so much fun!
We just have a "few minor details" to work out, to make sure "everyone" is happy:
1) The Franks can't be Rubashkin's because 3/4 of CH doesn't use Rubashkin's any more, because they can't trust Brooks CHK.
2) You have to work out the Dancing part, if the Dancing will be with or without Moshiach Flags or 1/2 and 1/2 to keep everyone happy.
3) Which rav will address or be honored, by the party?
Having both could be explosive and having only one, you will be boycotted by the other side.
4) Make sure to have the Riot police "on call", just in case Rubashkin looses his temper and gets into one of his Rage's and starts beating up people as he did by the Netzigim Meeting.
5) Which music?
If you play Yechi, then the all the Anti Meshichists will leave if you don't play yechi then 3/4 of CH will not come?
That's just "a few minor details" to be worked out.
All the rest should be smooth sailing....
Go for it!
The Block Party
Dovie's idea of a block party is fantastic. "Block Party Logistics" raises some important issues we will need to address and consider in order to implement it. But that should be an easy job. Just need to handle a few "details."
How do we handle the details? Let's see.
We will probably need to set up committees to handle each item. We should have reprentatives from the community, of course.
Hmmm, we can get repesentatives from each block, or each Shul on the block. Lets call them, uhm... maybe "netzigim."
Oh, and we'll need to elect a Chairman, to organize everything. And probably an executive committee, too.
And of course, it would be important and helpful to lobby the Rabbonim, so that we have rabbinic support.
Everyone will surely work together on this. And if there are differences of opinion...
Uh oh.. this is sounding all too familiar.
Oy, details, details.
Was it Gustave Flaubert who said: "The devil is in the details."?
No, it wasn't Gustave Flaubert.
I believe it was Berel Shemtov in the late 1960's, who, when asked by one of his workers why he gave him a thirty dollar check instead of a three hundred, and left off the detail of one of the zeros, replied: "zero shmero, detail shmetail, zerazeh, get out of here and go to Texas! And take the devil with you!"
v'chain hoyo.
Maybe you should limit this blog to people who can read and write English! The Rebbe was in charge of Merkos and Aguch. The Frierdiker Rebbe appointed him before most readers were born. He had complete control over 770's buildings.
Let justice take it's course. Merkos/Aguch will file for eviction, the judge will have no rerourse by to comply (he must follow statute and judicial precedent), and the gaboim will meet in Bris Sholom with Yisroel Best, Hertzog, and Mutchkin. Flying their flags and shrieking Yechi while downing pizza.
As an attorney who was following this case.Firstly I must say that the Judge did say the gabboim of the shule do have full control of the inside.
The outside is very uncertain the gabboim have much control.
Rabbi Krinsky is the landlord of the outside.
The place where the corner stone is is under the legal domain of the Building. There fore anyone who disfigure the plaque wwill be in contempt of court and will be subject to arrest.
the question was never about the shul it was the on the building i like the way now that the shul lost they are turning the story around
remember it started from the wall outside what to write on it and who owns it
the shul LOST this, the wall belongs to krisnky he can do what he wants now
there was no question about the shul itself they are renting it from krinsky and he can go now and throw them out and ask for money
For those for diasagree with my analysis of the respective rights regarding placement of the plaque,I say: "Midos, Midos? Mochin Mochin!" I am not taking sides just interputing the decision objectivley.
dear anonymous attorney: where did you go to law school? certainly not Harvard or Yale! Rabbi Krinsky is not the landlord of the outside- Merkos and Aguch own the ENTIRE building complex-- and the gabboim do not have the power you think they do. The Gabbi Shul is a squatter, and you even have to go to court to evict a squatter.
The judge simply wants the plaintiffs to file an eviction notice, which he will likely grant. He knows that Shalom Drizin may fund an apeal, and he said he wants his decisions legally air tight.
To Yisrael SAhalom:
The Rebbe was president of Agudas and Merkos. Rabbi Krinsky was on the executive commitee
Ahhh
So THAT'S why Krinsky didn't consider the Rebbe a "squatter" to try to evict him or make him pay rent.
Thanks for explaining it. Shalom Y.
Attorney from Chicago,
You don't know what you are talking about:
If I was Krinsky, I would trade you in, even in favor of a Law Student, in no time.
Because if you were, a real attorney Haroy Lishmoy, you would know at least the Aleph Beis of Law, that:
1) A Tennant who has a lease for say 100 years, you can NOT evict them before the duration of their lease is up (100 years for example) even after you win title to the building and even if the Judge says the same words used by Judge Harkavy.
2) An UNWRITTEN LEASE is just as powerful and often much more powerful and much harder to fight than a written lease.
3) In our case, the Shull has:
A) an Unwritten Lease to use the Shull Free as the Rebbe wanted it (even if Krinsky doesn't like it)
B) an Unwritten lease for AN INDEFINITE DURATION, which can never expire.
So even in 100 years from now you will still be "grinding your teeth and biting your tongue" on the outside, "with your Zaya", while we all dance inside with Moshiach Flags together with the Rebbe Melech Hamoshiach Behisgalus - Al Apo V'Al Chamoso of Krinsky and ShemTov together with all their crony's
To attorney from Yale.
Who is considerd the tennants of 770. you make it seem that the tennants are CLI, but in truth the tennants are the lubavitch community at large with CLI maintaning the facilities.
Can Krinsky say that I don't want to evict anyone, but rather I want to control my property by taking over the functions of CLI.
I am not an attorney. I am just asking out of curiosity.
What you say is actually exactly what he IS saying (since he can't afford the negative PR in the press that he is even attempting to evict yidden from a shull - as they did in Gush Katif and the Natzi's did etc)
However,
Legally it doesn't work.
You can't be a little bit pregnant.
Their is no such legal entity of 1/2 an eviction.
He has ZERO control unless he does a 100% eviction, and then, later if it was granted, he can start over and invite into his "private new shull", whoever he wants, as he does now in the Rebbe's room.
But since he can't evict Congregation Lubavitch at all, his quest for power and control (without eviction) can never happen legally.
You point is correct though but in exactly the opposite way:
Actually the reverse could happen (on Appeal) that "we the people" (Not Krinsky) can take over Aguch the entire building and Evict Krinsky.
Because as you say, the building belongs to Aguch which is NOT Krinsky. Aguch belongs to all Lubavitcher Chassidim but Krinsky "Hijacked" control of the organization without proper Elections, by All Luabvitcher Chassidim.
All Lubavitcher Chaasidim (not just Shluchim who are the minority of Lubavitchers), have a right to vote, as to who heads Aguch.
The Shull, Congregatiopn Lubavitch, leadership is Elected by the people, whereas, Aguch current leadership is an unelected Dictatorship by Krinsky and a few more self appointed crony's who have not been voted in by all Lubavitcher Chassidm as per the original Bylaws of Aguch-
Dear Attorney from Yale:
I suggest you research the case histories and statutes in McKinney's a bit more. You might not know what you are talking about, or are not familiar with this case and Judge Harkavy. There are some cases exactly on point where there was a valid lease which expired, and the religious group was evicted despite their protest.
Smile!
Hershel,
What you say is irrelevant since you are referring to a case where "a lease expired".
CLI's unwritten lease can never expire (it doesn't have and it never had any any expiration date).
If you have any specific case which you believe is identical or very similar to our case, please indicate specifically which case precisely you are talking about.
Yale Person:
Are you aware that the bylaws of Congregation Lubavitch Inc. only permit those persons who both regularly daven and financially contribute to vote for gabboim and shul decisions? I may only have a yeshiva education, but to me that would not permit Anash from other Crown Heights shuls and ALL Anash from out-of-town from voting for Gabboim. I think the case can be made that having the community vote for Gabboim at the same time as the Vaad HaKahol is not really legal. But as always, who follows rules in Crown Heights these days? He who huffs loudest puffs hardest.
Shloime,
I haven't seen the ByLaws of CLI but I would assume that krinsky's Big Buck's Lawyers, would have raised your argument IF you argument has any validity.
The fact the Krinsky never raised your argument in spite of rumors in the street that your version of the CLI's ByLaws are correct, I would think it's indicative of Krinsky being well aware that your claims wouldn't win him anything, in court, anyway.
The undertones of this debate don't (here and else... The undertones of this debate don't (here and elsewhere) don't sound at all Jewish although they do sound Middle Eastern.......
Both sides have declared victory. Well I guess when we turn to goyim to solve our disputes, what can we expect?
Sounding "Goyish" doesn't only mean simply a non-Jewish person (a gentile).
People sound non-Jewish because of the GOY Asher Bekirbecha - their Yetzer Hara.
onlyemes,
Your also right about your "middle eastern" point, since the call for "DIN RODEF" is a middle eastern way of "calling for a HIT on someones head" as in the middle eastern, Arab "Jihad".
Now you know WHO is the cause all the Machlokes in the Badatz, people who follow the "Jihad" = "Din Rodef" way of life....
to all major thinkers and intelignet people that comment here:
the REBBE is the one who decided that there should be no elections for aguch! the rebbe made sure to pass a special clause in the ny state legistature that aguch merkos dont need elections!!
we can now understand what nevuah the rebbe had and therfore set it up like this so c"v those who want to fight the rebbe (and always did) should never gain control of lubavitch
Where is your proof that what you say is true?
zimmerman said...
the REBBE is the one who decided that there should be no elections for aguch! the rebbe made sure to pass a special clause in the ny state legistature that aguch merkos dont need elections!!
Gevalt! You mean we have a blogger on this site who might have attended Yale Law School and who is defending the mechihisten "yechi" crowd? mamesh, too much. I wonder if anybody from Harvard or Columbia is into the yechi stuff, too? Let's hear from more Ivy Leaguers!
Yechi!
Attorney from Yale,
I have not looked into the details of an unwritten lease, But what is your basis for the claim that there exists and unwritten lease? Did Aguch and Merkos sit down and come to an agreement with CLI? Further even if there is an unwritten lease and the duration has not expired a tenant, particularly a non-residential tenant can be evicted early for violating terms of the lease.
Real Analysis,
Obviously they didn't "sit down" (to negotiate or make any deals or concessions etc), since The shull feels very confident, it will win any future court case (and appeal) so have no need and nothing to gain from "sitting down".
Regarding "violation of terms of lease", it doesn't apply in this case, since no such "terms" ever existed so it is theoretically impossible for any "terms" to ever be violated at any time in the past or future,
The Shull is in extremely powerful position in this regard.
Dear Mechihisten Yalie,
Explain me how a group of people can occupy a shul space without owning the space and claim why they should not be evicted? The gabboim did not organize as a corporation until 1994 and their bylaws read as the same as for any other neighborhood shtiebel. I heard the judge went to yeshiva and said this would be a real estate case, not one that was going to be looking at anything else, like you explain inside that Merkos would have said something in the trial before. My family is in real estate, and we evict people alll the time, with leases expiring or when they are making bad terms.
the old (Rebbes)gaboim were also members of aguch....
the old (Rebbes)gaboim were also members of aguch.
katz the father and then the son. so they were one and the same!
zev katz is still a gabai in 770! he can claim with good standing that he has never stoped being gabai!!!!
and CL was ......................................... and is part of the mishichis coup d'ta that took place in Lubavitch.
and now is the time to get rid of ................ and his yellow shirts.
and now I bet they can have Rabbi Ozdaba on their side!
it will be aguch/merkos/vadd hakohol/Rabbi Osdoba - vs. - Reb Mendel Hendel/bais moshiach/Rabbi Shvai/Gaboim
על דאטפת אטפוך, וסוף מטופיך יטופון
Anonymous,
You forgot Avreml Shemtov.
Rabbi Osdoba shook hands with him even though Shemtov is in a Siruv and even though shemtov took the shull to court and even though;
Check out Rabbi Osodoba's DIN RODEF LETTER!
according to Rabbi Osdoba, Shemtov and Krisnky are Posul L'Eidus and Posul L'Shvuah and their Schita is Posul and the are considered by Rabbi Osdoba to be a "Mumer" (i.e. Apikores) for going to court
- instead of them taking the Gaboim to a Din Torah.
And don't forget that "your dear friend" Rabbi Osdoba, also calls for "a hit" on them, of DIN RODEF on Krinsky and Shemtovs heads....because that's what rabbi Osdoba says about EVERYONE who goes to court instead of only do Rabbi Osdoba's Beis Din (no other beis din is good enough).
But if you still can fool yourself to think that Rabbi Osdoba loves these 2 Mumers' Posul Leshchita and Posul L'Edus....
Enjoy yourself!
Just remember exactly how "much" Rabbi Osdoba really, "respects" your choice of "spiritual leaders".
It's mind boggling how the Left, has such an inferiority complex, that the moment Rabbi Osdoba (Strong Right) gives them the slightest bit of "Kovod", merely just shaking the hand of the Mesurev, Shemtov;
Immediately all the Left, "Melts" and is "so overjoyed" from the Huge Kovod for them, that the Rav who said about their own "Spiritual Leaders" Ko, Hashemos Asher Kinu Loy Chazal, Mamash;
- Yet as soon as the feel "so honored" that HE (out of all people) shook the Mesurev L'din's hand, (at the OT Mikveh Building) they are immediately ready to "hire him" to replace their existing spiritual leader.
Where is the Lefty's, Self Respect ? ? ?
Enjoy your fun (until you figure out the truth, what he really thinks about you all).
You (the Left) are just being "USED" by "them", as long as it suits their needs, and they will dump "the Left", in a second, the moment they don't need you any longer.
Wake Up and Smell the Coffee!
The left is being "used",
Your right.
Proof is that if Rabbi Osdoba had even the SLIGHTEST bit of real respect for Krinsky and Shemtov, then he will have to go to Beis Rivka for the Gimel Tamuz Farbrengen! ! !
No Chance of that Happening because, like you say, he never went to the Beis Rivka party because Krinsky and Shem Tov are Mesurev Ledin;
And because they went to Court so Rabbi Osdoba writes in his letter, from 2 weeks ago, that anyone who goes to court, like Krinsky and Shem Tov, all have a "Din Rodef" and are both Posul L'Eidus and Psosul L'Shvuah and are both Mumer's (both are like Apikursim according to Rabbi Osdoba's letter) and "what not"?
This means that when Rabbi Osdoba is Mesader Kidushin, he would NEVER use Krinsky or Shemtov as an Eidus because that would render it to be an illegitimate wedding because Rabbi Osdoba holds that they are Both Posul L'Eidus ! ! !
Try that, next time, Rabbi Osdoba is Mesader Kidushin, offer to have Krisnky or Shemtov as "Eidus", and see for yourself, Rabbi Osdoba's refusal to accept them as Kosher Jews, at all.
פרקי אבות said...
על דאטפת אטפוך, וסוף מטופיך יטופון
Yep,
Your right.
That's what happens to the hypocritical "Poseach Al Shtei Haseifim":
They think that their False "Chanifa" to Both Sides, will "make them friends" from both sides...
But in the end, it backfires, because, Emes M'Eretz Tizmach, and they end up being considered "a Treiter" by BOTH Sides and Dumped by both sides and "Kereach Mikan V'Kereach M'Kan"!
The Shul in 770 belongs to every Chosid.
But the Non-profit Corporation CLI which was incorporated in 1994 (in believe) is a tenant. A tenant can be evicted with a valid reason.
So according to this ruling, CLI can be evicted from being the governing board of what happens in the building, without throwing out the Chasidim.
lchaim,
You are wrong.
On the contrary:
According to what you say it follows that Krinsky can be thrown out from Governing Aguch.
Krinsky is not Aguch (he merely, illegitimately, hijacked control of Aguch).
In truth, Aguch belongs to ALL Lubavitcher Chassidm (NOT "only Shluchim" as Krinsky would have you believe).
lchaim said...
So according to this ruling, CLI can be evicted from being the governing board of what happens in the building, without throwing out the Chasidim.
Mendel,
Technically you are right. (if not for the fact that the Rebbe appointed Rabbi Krinsky).
I wasn't going in to WHO is right or wrong, and who is doing a good job. My point was that just because 770 belongs to every Chosid, does not mean that you and I can open a legal entity, and use 770 as the address and location.
So "evicting" CLI, would not be taking away 770 from us, as I wrote in the previous post.
Post a Comment
<< Home