Florida attorney Mikal W. Grass emails me:
Finally, a more comprehensive rendition of what is actually going on in the case, even if the person providing the summary is defense counsel. Attorney Sobel does an admirable job of stating his client’s case, however, his pleadings are full of obfuscation and red herrings, which is not surprising considering his client’s battle is an uphill one. Still, an extremely admirable effort, though.
What irks me about this case is that the Rabbi refuses to turn the scrolls over to the rightful owner. Forget for a second that the Rabbi says his signature was valid in several spots but cut and pasted in others (as if all Rabbis are incapable of deceit and / or fraud), or that the other attorney, the one versed in Jewish law, was not permitted to be present at the arbitration. This Rabbi’s actions smack of the same hubris and conceit that many of the world’s great museums acted with in refusing to return over works of art that were stolen during WW2 because of the lack of “proper documentation.” To turn the works of art over to the rightful owners would be to admit that the museum might have acquired the art in less than perfect circumstances, so better to litigate the issue and bury financially the plaintiffs. It is bullying at its best, and is similar to the SLAPP suits that big corporations file against individuals who are vocal in their criticism of the corporations.
Yeah yeah, I know the argument on the other side, that museums would go out of business if all of the works that were alleged to have been stolen were returned to their rightful owners. The argument doesn’t hold water because theses cases are few and far between and most people don’t even know that art might have been stolen from their families by the Nazis or whomever. Likewise, the Rabbi is loathe to hand over the scrolls because he feels it will open up the floodgates to the family members of other “donors” who wish to have the scrolls returned because the family members feel that the scrolls were a gift to the synagogue, or because they may wish to sell the scrolls. Furthermore, I am sure the Rabbi is fighting this because he doesn’t want the scrolls returned on “his watch.”
The Rabbi undoubtedly had a wonderful relationship with the deceased, however, the wife obviously doesn’t have the same relationship. I will bet dollars to donuts that at night, during pillow talk, Rabbi Pauker and his wife, discussed the scrolls and their eventual final resting place, and it was with the nephews, not the old synagogue.
The Rabbi is hoping to drag out the case, in hope that the widow will pass away. If that happens, he will probably tangle with the nephews, who might be younger and better fueled for a fight.
Rabbi Ohana, your motives are not pure. Give the lady her scrolls and move on.
