Agudas Chasidei Chabad of the U.S. v. Congregation Lubavitch, Inc.
Decision Date | 25 April 2020 |
Docket Number | Index Nos. 106105/2011, 106106/2011, 106107/2011 |
Citation | 127 N.Y.S.3d 252 (Table),67 Misc.3d 1214 (A) |
Parties | AGUDAS CHASIDEI CHABAD OF THE UNITED STATES, Petitioner-Licensor, v. CONGREGATION LUBAVITCH, INC., Zalman Lipskier, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, and in his representative capacity to President of Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad, Avrohom Holtzberg, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai and in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Menachem Gerlitzky, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Yosef Losh, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Sholom Ber Kievman, individual, as an employee of CLI and as an employee of Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad and Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, Respondents-Licensees. Merkos L'Inyonei Chunuch, Petitioner-Licensor, v. Congregation Lubavitch, Inc., Zalman Lipskier, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, and in his representative capacity to President of Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad, Avrohom Holtzberg, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai and in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Menachem Gerlitzky, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Yosef Losh, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Sholom Ber Kievman, individual, as an employee of CLI and as an employee of Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad and Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, Respondents-Licensees. Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch, Petitioner-Licensor, v. Congregation Lubavitch, Inc., Zalman Lipskier, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, and in his representative capacity to President of Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad, Avrohom Holtzberg, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai and in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Menachem Gerlitzky, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Yosef Losh, individually and in his capacity as Gabbai, in his capacity as Trustee of CLI, Sholom Ber Kievman, individual, as an employee of CLI and as an employee of Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, Congregation Lubavitch of Agudas Chasidei Chabad and Congregation Lubavitch, purportedly d/b/a Lubavitch World Headquarters, 302-304 Kingston Avenue, Southest Room of the Second Floor, as more specifically delineated by the non-cross-hatched area on the diagram annexed hereto as Exhibit "1", Brooklyn, New York 11213 ("the premises"), Respondents-Licensees. |
Court | New York Supreme Court |
Attorneys for Petitioners: The Abramson Law Group, 570 Lexington Avenue, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10022.
Attorneys for all Respondents except for Losh and Gerlitzky: Zane and Rudofsky, The Starrett Lehigh Building, 601 West 26th Street, New York, NY 10001.
Attorney for Respondent Gerlitzky: Noson A. Kopel, Esq., 1653 President Street, Brooklyn, NY 11213.
The real property laws in the State and City of New York are complex and often misconstrued by laypersons and lawyers alike. These summary proceedings to recover possession of real property would be a simple licensee holdover proceeding pursuant to RPAPL § 713 (7), however, these particular properties have historical significance for all of the parties because the real properties here are owned and controlled by religious corporations organized under the laws of the State of New York. As in any action or proceeding involving religious institutions, the applicable rules of law and regulations, and their application to such institutions, excludes any consideration by the courts of the religious doctrinal differences and beliefs between the parties. As such, a historical prospective of the most significant part of this nearly two decade old controversy between these parties and the procedural history of their litigation for this determination, albeit lengthy, is necessary. The litigation history determined specific material questions of fact and law including but not limited to the determinations made by the Supreme Court, Kings County (Harkavy, J., retired and deceased), and the Appellate Division, Second Department. Although the controversy is deeply rooted in a difference in doctrinal theology, the legal issue can be stated succinctly: do the Petitioners have the authority to recover possession of the demised premises herein under applicable law of this state.
About the parties and as will be shown from the record, Agudas Chasidei Chabad of the United States (hereinafter "Agudas") is a religious corporation that was incorporated in 1940 to, inter alia, establish, maintain, and conduct a place of worship in accordance with the Chasidic ritual and mode of worship of the Jewish Orthodox faith, and to acquire real property for that purpose. Following its incorporation, Agudas purchased 770 Eastern Parkway (hereinafter "770"), in Kings County, which became, among other things, the central Synagogue of the Lubavitch movement.
Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch (hereinafter "Merkos"), a non-profit corporation, was incorporated in 1942, to operate as the educational arm of the Lubavitch movement. Following its incorporation, Merkos acquired the deed to 784-788 Eastern Parkway, (hereinafter "784-788"), the property adjacent to 770. The two properties are now adjoined, and the central Synagogue spans both buildings.
CLI was incorporated in 1996 as a non-profit corporation, for the purpose of succeeding and continuing the work of the unincorporated religious congregation known as Congregation Lubavitch, whose members regularly attended religious worship and studies at the Synagogue.
The Gabboim are the "managers" of the central Synogogue, as will be more fully discussed below.
On December 10, 2004, Merkos commenced a Supreme court action against Congregation Lubavitch, Inc., Mendel Sharf, Yaacov Thaler, and Bentizon Frishman for injunctive relief with respect to the defacing, destruction and/or removal of a controversially worded plaque that plaintiffs sought to affix to 784-788, which commemorated the laying of a cornerstone by Grand Rebbe Menachem Mendel Shneerson, the grand rabbi and spiritual leader of the Lubavitch movement from 1951 until his death in 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the "Grand Rebbe" or "Rebbe") and which referred to the Grand Rebbe in Hebrew terms transcribed in English "of blessed memory." The aforementioned defendants were arrested and prosecuted for the unauthorized removal of the plaque. In addition at that time, an ex-parte TRO was issued by the Hon. Yvonne Lewis which enjoined individual defendants from interfering with Merkos' right to install a new plaque with the "of blessed memory" reference or from removing or damaging said plaque. The TRO further directed that the New York City Police Department "take all steps as are reasonably necessary" to enforce the terms of the TRO. Despite the TRO, on December 15, 2004, while workers were installing the new plaque, another altercation occurred and additional arrests were made. From the inception of this lengthy controversy, CLI and certain of its members opposed the installation of a worded plaque on the cornerstone of the buildings and further claimed an interest in the property pursuant to a constructive or ‘community trust’ and accordingly, had authority to determine the use and occupancy of the property.
To continue reading
Request your trial