To win a courtcase, there must be some contact with the opposing counsel. In the case of Etz Chaim/Ohr Saadya or ECOS (Every Congregant's Overtly Sinning) there was a winner before any correspondence was sent between Akiva Shapiro ECOS lawyer and Teaneck.
When going to court against a township, especially in the case of "religious discrimination" and the duress of Robert Erlich, it is important to pick an experienced and qualified lawyer to help you win. But that's not the case here. ECOS picked a lawyer who values something more than religious freedom for the Shtibshul Prayer Group. It can't be the money because he is doing the case pro bono, so what is in it for him?
Lets learn a little bit more about Akiva Shapiro from Martindale (a handy website where you can research lawyers). I'll be sure to bold the important parts.
Akiva Shapiro is an associate in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's New York office, where he is a member of the firm's Litigation Practice, as well as its Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group. Mr. Shapiro's practice focuses on a broad range of appellate, constitutional, criminal, and complex commercial litigation matters, often involving challenges to the policies and legal determinations of government actors. Mr. Shapiro is regularly engaged in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, federal and state courts of appeal, and New York's trial courts. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Some representative matters in which Mr. Shapiro has been involved include: Persuading a New York appellate court to grant an emergency stay, and issue a precedent-setting ruling on the merits, preventing the NYPD from continuing to target the ticket-sales practices of an entertainment venue; representing a brand drug manufacturer in an interlocking, multi-year cluster of intellectual property lawsuits, both at trial and on appeal ; suing to prevent the implementation of a statute on takings and environmental impact grounds; and a wide range of high-stakes commercial disputes involving-among other things-fraud, breach of contract, and class action claims. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Mr. Shapiro has participated in the preparation of numerous certiorari and merits stage briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, including as principal architect and author of a number of amicus briefs relied on by the Court in the constitutional, criminal-immigration, and separation of powers contexts.
Mr. Shapiro is also currently leading the trial team in a suit to protect the land use and First Amendment rights of a New Jersey synagogue; for his work on that case, among others, Mr. Shapiro was nominated for the Frank Wheat Award, given to lawyers in the firm who demonstrate leadership and obtain significant results for their pro bono clients.
Mr. Shapiro earned his Juris Doctor in 2008 from Columbia Law School, where he was a senior editor of the Columbia Law Review, a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar, and a semifinalist in the Harlan Fiske Stone Honors Moot Court competition. After law school, Mr. Shapiro served as a research assistant to Judge Debra Livingston of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and to Professor Harold Edgar. He also received a Master's Degree in Religious Studies from Yale University, where he was a member of the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities and the recipient of a Yale University Fellowship. In 2001, Mr. Shapiro graduated from Columbia University with a Bachelor of Arts in History. Mr. Shapiro is admitted to practice in the State of New York and before the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Mr. Shapiro regularly speaks on constitutional and legal ethics topics , and has published "Should the Lower Courts Save Taxpayer Standing?" in The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, 10 J. APP. PRAC. & PROCESS 273 (2009)."
When going to court against a township, especially in the case of "religious discrimination" and the duress of Robert Erlich, it is important to pick an experienced and qualified lawyer to help you win. But that's not the case here. ECOS picked a lawyer who values something more than religious freedom for the Shtibshul Prayer Group. It can't be the money because he is doing the case pro bono, so what is in it for him?
Lets learn a little bit more about Akiva Shapiro from Martindale (a handy website where you can research lawyers). I'll be sure to bold the important parts.
| |||||
| University | Columbia University, Bachelor of Arts, History, 2001; Yale University, Master of Arts, Religious Studies, 2008 | ||||
| Law School | Columbia University Law School, Juris Doctor, 2008 | ||||
| Admitted | 2009, New York; U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York | ||||
Akiva Shapiro is an associate in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's New York office, where he is a member of the firm's Litigation Practice, as well as its Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group. Mr. Shapiro's practice focuses on a broad range of appellate, constitutional, criminal, and complex commercial litigation matters, often involving challenges to the policies and legal determinations of government actors. Mr. Shapiro is regularly engaged in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, federal and state courts of appeal, and New York's trial courts. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Some representative matters in which Mr. Shapiro has been involved include: Persuading a New York appellate court to grant an emergency stay, and issue a precedent-setting ruling on the merits, preventing the NYPD from continuing to target the ticket-sales practices of an entertainment venue; representing a brand drug manufacturer in an interlocking, multi-year cluster of intellectual property lawsuits, both at trial and on appeal ; suing to prevent the implementation of a statute on takings and environmental impact grounds; and a wide range of high-stakes commercial disputes involving-among other things-fraud, breach of contract, and class action claims. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Mr. Shapiro has participated in the preparation of numerous certiorari and merits stage briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, including as principal architect and author of a number of amicus briefs relied on by the Court in the constitutional, criminal-immigration, and separation of powers contexts.
Mr. Shapiro is also currently leading the trial team in a suit to protect the land use and First Amendment rights of a New Jersey synagogue; for his work on that case, among others, Mr. Shapiro was nominated for the Frank Wheat Award, given to lawyers in the firm who demonstrate leadership and obtain significant results for their pro bono clients.
Mr. Shapiro earned his Juris Doctor in 2008 from Columbia Law School, where he was a senior editor of the Columbia Law Review, a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar, and a semifinalist in the Harlan Fiske Stone Honors Moot Court competition. After law school, Mr. Shapiro served as a research assistant to Judge Debra Livingston of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and to Professor Harold Edgar. He also received a Master's Degree in Religious Studies from Yale University, where he was a member of the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities and the recipient of a Yale University Fellowship. In 2001, Mr. Shapiro graduated from Columbia University with a Bachelor of Arts in History. Mr. Shapiro is admitted to practice in the State of New York and before the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. (Since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most - my addition)
Mr. Shapiro regularly speaks on constitutional and legal ethics topics , and has published "Should the Lower Courts Save Taxpayer Standing?" in The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, 10 J. APP. PRAC. & PROCESS 273 (2009)."
Very impressive guy this Akiva Shapiro and he totally fits ECOS. He graduated college in 2001 and got his MA in religious studies and his JD in 2008, from two different Universities located in two different states. Very impressive to go to Yale and Columbia concurrently and earn those degrees. He was admitted to the bar in 2009. That's a ton of education and experience for ECOS to draw upon to help them win, NOT!
Akiva Shapiro has an impressive write up and has achieved a lot since 2009 - 2 1/2 years at most. Obviously ECOS wasn't happy with their last lawyer and they took on this experienced lawyer to show Teaneck that they mean business, afterall he was the lawyer who prepared a brief for Zivotofsky vs Clinton which was argued in the Supreme Court in 2011.
So what is in it for Etz Chaim/Ohr Saadya or ECOS (Every Congregant's Overtly Sinning) ? Why Akiva Shapiro?
- He's a member of ECOS
- He's doing it Pro Bono
- He convinced Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman its a good idea
- Zalman Levine doesn't like losing
- Robert Erlich wasn't happy with the accurate quotes in the various newspapers
- Since Mario Guralnik is not involved with ECOS anymore they feel their chances for victory greatly improved
- ECOS already used Jason Flynn for their parking initiative and it failed
- Gary Miller was extremely active and disappeared
- They will have nothing to talk about during laining if there are no lawsuits
Teaneck loses either way because the tax payers have to foot the bill for the BOA's defense.
Akiva Shapiro, ESQ has already won.
- He is lead counsel on this case.
- He was nominated for the Frank Wheat Award, given to lawyers in the firm who demonstrate leadership and obtain significant results for their pro bono clients.
- He was honored at Etz Chaim/Ohr Saadya's last dinner.
- He was promised 2 aliya's a month by Levi Goldberg and then Levi changed it to 3 aliya's because Zalman told him to.
- Rabbi Daniel Feldman will speak at Beth Aaron on a Tuesday night in his honor, for a modest donation of course.
- He will have his picture and name in prestigious newspapers like the Jewish Standard and Teaneck Suburbanite.
- Columbia and Yale will write about him in their alumnus newsletters.
- The Famous Urine Cake King will give Akiva a lifetime supply of splash guards and cakes for his urinals.
- Free high risk deliveries from Dr. Abdelhak.
- Mario Guralnik promised him free parking in his backyard.
- Rochelle Mandelbaum will make sure he gets all the approvals to extend his house, when Akiva is ready.
- Elliot Frome put in a huge bet in Vegas on the verdict and promised Akiva 10%.
- Allan Chanan Cohen promised to smile if Akiva wins.
Akiva Shapiro arranged special permission to argue the case in NJ because he is only recognized in NYS.
He wins no matter what the outcome, because Akiva doesn't "really" care about ECOS or money. Akiva wants the recognition, the press, the awards and the accolades. Akiva Shapiro is 2 1/2 years into his law career and isn't focused on the outcome. Being first chair is all he cares about and he steered ECOS and Teaneck into the lawsuit for personal reasons.
Akiva Shapiro is the perfect lawyer for Etz Chaim/Ohr Saadya. They both fit together
36 comments:
Yale and Columbia, wow impressive, can t do much better than that.
I wonder if someone held a guy to Bob Erlich's head when he sent the email saying his congregation was good with the stipulations from the BOA? I sure hope Mr. Shapiro can prove Bob's duress.
I doubt there was any duress. EC/OS is just angry that they agreed to the stipulated conditions. The restrictions prevent them from fully being a shul, so they argue duress and that they were coersed into accepting these conditions.
Hey Mac what are you going to do when they win. There will be nothing to discuss. Good or evil will prevail, I do not know which side they stand on.
The restrictions don't prevent them from being a house of worship. Etz Chaim officially asked to use the "family room" which they built for the purpose of being a house of worship as such. They got what they asked for. All applications to be houses of worship in residential neighborhoods are subject to conditions. That Etz Chaim can't have kiddush for longer than one hour does or put up in a sign or host community events does not make them any less a house of worship.
Excellent point because ECOS is partially parsonage and partially synagogue. They deserve restrictions because of the nature of the property.
Time to buy Rabbi Daniel Feldman a new house.
I heard rumors that he is looking for another house. Maybe the rabbi realizes his days with Etz Chaim are numbered. Or maybe he I hedging his bets that they're going to lose the lawsuit and he doesn't want to be involved with a group that was proven wrong all the way by a court of law.
I thought they had already bid on a house for Feldman?
Yeah anon 8:10, they probably bid on a house for him already, closed, had a lechaim to celebrate and didn't bother telling him yet. :))
In court anything goes
That is not true Mac, the Court will not just allow anyone to get their way, these dudes need to prove their case. I doubt that Shapiro is the lead attorney, I would think that they would wa.t someone with more litigation experience trying the case.
Why were you posting comments on shabbos Mac, you will even violate the Sabbath to spread your hatred and lies, for shame for shame.
Good for Mr. Shapiro, doesn t mean they are right and it doesn t mean they will win and it doesn t sound like he has much trial experience. Just because he argued the motion doesn t make him the lead trial counsel. It is a lot harder trying a case than it is arguing a motion for Summary Judgment. Not impressed.
Representing Teaneck: Andrew L. Indek
Title: Partner Primary Office: Warren, NJ Other Office: New York, NY Practice Area/s: Commercial Law and Litigation , Insurance, Professional Liability , General Liability Telephone: 973.854.1064 | Fax: 973.242.1945 Email: aindeck@wglaw.com
Click for PDF version Download VCard
Professional Experience:
Mr. Indeck dedicates a significant portion of his practice to representing clients in a wide variety of commercial transactions and litigated business disputes. He has successfully negotiated and drafted numerous employment agreements, asset purchase agreements and partnership agreements for small businesses and professionals. Mr. Indeck has successfully represented corporations, LLC's, sole proprietorships and partnerships including individual directors, officers, partners, shareholders and employees in litigation involving breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, self dealing, fraud, breach of restrictive covenants, infringement of intellectual property rights, related business torts and U.C.C. claims.
Mr. Indeck has also dedicated over twenty years of his legal career to representation of insurance carriers with respect to coverage issues related to the following types of policies: Directors and Officers, Errors and Omissions, Employment Practices Liability Insurance, Surety and Performance Bond, Comprehensive General Liability, Legal, Accounting and Medical Professional Errors and Omissions, Commercial Property and Casualty, Inland Marine and Business Auto. He has also assisted clients impacted by government imposed rehabilitation and liquidation of financially troubled insurance carriers. Related to the above, Mr. Indeck has assisted clients participating in domestic and off-shore captive insurance programs with respect to regulatory compliance, policy language, "ceding arrangements" between off-shore facilities/programs and U.S. based carriers/paper, valuation, claims history, underwriting, underwriting profit, I.B.N.R. issues and investment income.
In addition, he has extensive experience representing clients in litigations involving the following types of claims: legal, medical, accounting and insurance broker and agent professional liability, commercial insurance subrogation claims, employment discrimination (L.A.D. and A.D.A.), products liability, Civil Rights §§ 1983, 1985 and 1988, prerogative writs actions and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (R.L.U.I.P.A.). Mr. Indeck's experience in these areas includes representation of insurance carriers, their insureds, private individuals, corporations, municipalities and other public entities.
Education:
Rutgers University School of Law, J.D., 1988
Rutgers University, B.A., 1985
Professional Memberships and Activities:
Mr. Indeck is admitted to practice in New Jersey, New York and the District of Columbia as well as before the United States Courts of Appeals, Third Circuit. He is a member of the New Jersey State Bar Association, Defense Research Institute, Claims Litigation Management and the Professional Liability Underwriting Society. Mr. Indeck was named to the New Jersey Law Journal's '40 Under 40' list. The New Jersey Law Journal's annual special issue honors a select group of 40 young, exceptional attorneys in private practices across the State of New Jersey.
Akiva doesn't need to worry about the past history. He blames the town in his complaint for considering the neighbors' concerns. According to Akiva, the town's restrictions on EC were only done
" to appease a handful of vocal neighbors whose opposition was totally divorced from any legitimate zoning concern, rooted instead in unfounded and utterly irrelevant conspiracy theories."
I didn't realize 78 is a handful or that neighbors' concerns, which is something that comes up at every BOA hearing amounts to "conspiracy theories." Doesn't sound like very good lawyering.
Problem for Akiva is he has to show that the statements by Robert Ehrlich and Daniel Feldman about what they wanted were not true. They said they wanted only sabbath and holidays. They wouldn't need parking because no one drives (but everyone parks and leaves their car there overnight). He has to show that Feldman's dispute in front of the RCBC about a shul was abandoned to build a family room and then resurrected for the BOA. That the BOA doesn't have a legitimate concern in protecting the neighbors from a group that has
consistently misled, obfuscated and lied under oath.
Piece of cake for old Akiva. Best lawyer anyone could ask for - for free.
"One neighbor t e s t i f i ed tha t people a t t ending s e rvi c e s a t Etz Chaim do not l e ave the i r c a r s pa rked on the s t r e e t out s ide the property, and tha t the prope r ty wa s not maint a ined we ll by 13 pr evious owner s but is now we l l -ma intained by Etz Chaim."
What a crock! No one testified about 13 previous owners. Mr. Cohen a congregant got up and cited a newspaper article that mistated that the congregation had cleaned up the property. NOT TRUE. Mr. George Criollo the person who they purchased the property from had cleaned it up repaired the damage cause by a fire. The congregation had NOTHING to do with that. Also Mr. Cohen should not have been testifying since he as a congregant was represented by a lawyer.
Nice twisting of the facts Akiva.
I thought the Or Saadya name was for Abdalhak's grandfather? At least that is what I heard, nothing to do with Cohen. Isn't Abdalhak or Dr. Abdalhak the one who made the 150 thousand dollar donation to change the name?
Arielle Cohen is abdelhak's sister? I didn't realize chanan Cohen was related to abdelhak but now it explains a lot.
I cannot argue with that, something else I did not know. Oh well.
Not only was he Etz Chaim's lawyer but also......drum roll please......... wait for it.
MARIO GURALNIK
Remember him? threatening to make the block go hell by building a shul. Whose employee was cutting the grass and shoveling the snow for Etz Chaim? Who let the builder Build the ark for etz chaim in his backyard at 576 Queen Anne? Whose workers were doing the labor on the basement of Etz Chaim without a permit? Oh yeah who were the people who incorporated the illegal synagogue at 576 Queen Anne ? Recognize any of the names?
Garelnik is EC's sugar daddy. Has anyone seen him lately?
Maybe these guys are all Russian under cover agents and their real goal is to overthrow the U S Government beginning with Teaneck. It is a commie plot. You have uncovered the greatest threat to our nation in history Mac. You are a hero. These terrorists must be stopped. What say you Mac doo, what say you?
Anon 6:59 you are really trivializing a very serious issue. And it's not just a problem with Etz Chaim. The problem extends to much of the orthodox community of Teaneck who thinks that everything is their right and is due to them. This self-righteous, self-centered attitude is everywhere in Teaneck from the Rabbis to the average Jew on the street. So, go ahead 6:59 and make this a joke. It's really not and the Etz Chaim folk are just the ones who are emblematic of Teaneck orthodoxy's arrogance.
7:23, that's not fair. No other Ortho synagogue did what EC did. They all asked the BOA first before building their houses of worship. Also, the cast of characters in EC is rather unique.
Anon 7:28 You are right and I probably shouldn't have lumped everyone together. Just upset about the Etz Chaim holier-than-though, I deserve everything attitude. Most of the orthodox in Teaneck really are good, law-abiding citizens. For me to have generalized from Etz Chaim to the whole was not fair. But it doesn't change things: the sense of entitlement is sickening and the way these people flaunt the laws we all follow is disgusting.
You are right Anon 7:23 I am trializing it because this blog is a joke, it exists because Mac hates these guys and that is the sole motivation for doing it. It has nothing to do with his or her belief that they are breaking the law or damaging the orthodox community. He hates these guys and that is what fuels his obsession with wanting these guys to fail.
No anon 8:17, I think MacDougal hates them because they are evildoers. I think he'd also go after any other group who he finds morally repugnant whether their name is Or Sadiya, Etz Chaim, 554 Queen Anne Inc, Torat Chesed, Toras Chesed or anyone else.
You are 100% wrong 8:29 this blog was created for them and if you think otherwise then you may be interested in buying the Brooklyn Bridge because I would be happy to sell too you.
Anon 8:29, do you think if there was a church or a mosque that acting questionably in how they dealt with zoning issues in forming a house of worship that this mutt would create a blog to take them to task? Because if you do then you are a very dim witted dude. That is this blog is evil unto itself. Evil at its finest.
Anonymous, if that is your real name, for my motivation for writing this blog please refer to my posting
http://macdmusings.blogspot.com/2010/03/power-outrage.html?m=0
Anon 8:49 or 9:02, why defend them. They are wrong. They are absolutely wrong for suing the town of Teaneck especially after they got what they asked for, to be a prayer group. Does it really matter what motivates Mac in doing this blog? Show me who else is out there holding these guys accountable. Once they sued Teaneck that was enough for me. That made me a Mac supporter so get off the blog if it bothers you.
You know what 9:02, your right, you are totally right. MacDougal may have started the blog just to stand up against Etz Chaim. You know what else 9:02, MacDougal has my vote! At least he is standing up against the evil that is Etz Chaim. I give MacDougal a standing ovation!!!!
What ticks me off is that didn't consult any neighbors before they did this except George Criolo who they bought the house from. Maybe Mario guralnik who owned 556 Queen anne but never lived there. Everything was subrosa and then they claim to be good neighbors. Then they claim they will increase diversity in the neighborhood. It's true we never saw an orthodox jew here in this neighborhood. Now if they were worshipers of Thor or Cthulu that would diversify the neighborhood but its like bringing coals to New Castle.
Betty Gabel is the key.
How is Betty Gabel the key? The key is Abdulhak, the origins of this group start with him. They walked out of Arzei because of him. Betty Gable is just part of the process. Everything begins and ends with Dr. A.
Post a Comment