SIRUV ISSUED BY RABBI BELSKYS BEIS DIN AGAINST AISH HATORAH NY (Lefkowitz) SIRUV ISSUED BY RABBI BELSKYS BEIS DIN AGAINST AISH HATORAH NY R Belskys Siruv against Aish
A shtar siruv (also spelled seruv) is a form of contempt of court order issued by a beth din (rabbinical court) in an effort to compel action by an individual.
The siruv has been described as a form of cherem (which combines characteristics of shunning or excommunication) for a party who refuses to appear before a beth din. Under the terms of a siruv, the individual is to be shunned by the community until the terms of the order issued by the beth din are addressed. While most Jewish litigants are adjured from pursuing justice against other Jews in the civil court system, in the case of a siruv, the beth din may permit use of the secular courts by the plaintiff.
Relating to the case that Mr. Fetman brought against Aish NY / Greenman / Markowitz
To Whom it may concern,
This Beis Din sent three orders to these individuals and they refused to come to Beis Din. The Beis Din also sent letters to their attorneys compelling them to come to Beis Din in this matter but to our great sorrow they chose not to come to Beis Din, giving excuses that are meaningless and worthless.
All these excuses are deemed nullified and have no value at all.
It is this Beis Din Opinion that these individuals are in Contempt of Beis Din and everything that is written in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deash 364) is relevant to these individuals and anyone that can pressure them to go back from their evil ways and come to Beis Din should do so and it will be a great merit for them.
Rabbi Yisroel Belsky
Rabbi Avraham Raataa
Rabbi A. Kirsh
These individuals ignored this Beis Din orders to come to Beis Din and it is shocking that these people who manage such an organization are not following Hallacha and Din Torah.
R. Yisroel Belsky
R. Yaakov Libman
R. Avraham Raata
UPDATE JULY 22, 2015:
A source emails:
With regards to the allegations against Jacob Fetman, an attorney familiar with the case points out that Justice Demarest in her decision to confirm Rabbi Cohen’s award of $20,000,000 (twenty million dollars), made it clear that she did not review the merits of the case – her focus was to confirm or reject this award. As it is the public policy in NY state to uphold arbitration awards and because of the fact that there were no transcripts of the arbitration sessions (4 sessions totaling 140 minutes) she had no choice but to confirm the award – despite her reservations about Fetman’s allegations of the many violations of his Due Process. For example, in court it was acknowledged that a forensic report, which R’ Cohen bases his award on, was never provided to Fetman and in fact, once the judge ordered Aish to produce it (April 25, 2015 – almost 18 months after the award was issued), it was found to be dated AFTER the last session and on the date of the AWARD. Clearly, there was no chance for Fetman to dispute any of its ‘findings’.
It is note worthy that a criminal complaint which was alleged by Aish against Jacob Fetman is still pending in Brooklyn Supreme court for the alleged theft of $236,000 over five years – Mr. Fetman plead Not Guilty to this allegation and a trial is pending.
While Aish is a wonderful organization, with a very important mission, in court papers it was alleged by Fetman that executive compensation was substantially under reported and disguised as activities. Rabbi Greenman’s compensation over 2012 reported as (aish 990 filing) $101,409 taxable income and an additional $94,000 non taxable income was in fact almost double that. David Markowitz’s taxable compensation of $62,500 with an additional $50,000 non taxable compensation was in fact about $150,000. 2013 reported income for Rabbi Greenman was $118,310 taxable and combined compensation (with non taxable compensation) $216,929. Aish chose not to divulge any other executive compensation.
If the allegation against Fetman is correct – Aish NY, an organization with an internal budget of about $3 million dollars annually could have not “noticed” that $1.2 million annually was being stolen from it?? Why is it that Aish will not submit to examination of the ‘forensic report’ – what was the rush to issue an award when an attorney intervened on behalf of Fetman?
See attached Justice Demarest’s decision that Aish must produce the ‘forensic report’ to Fetman – when it was acknowledged that Fetman never received it. The award was issued 12/17/2013 – This decision by the court is 4/25/2015.
See the attached DA statement – Aish NY used Fetman and Merkaz the Center as a funnel to transfer monies from Project Inspire to Aish NY. Hundreds of thousand of dollars were transferred this way.
Lastly, see Dan Stein’s (Fetman’s original attorney and now the Chief of the Criminal Division at the US attorney General’s Office NY Western District) letter to R’ Cohen right after the award was issued and another letter to Mel Zachter, a noted accountant who agreed to examine the ‘forensic report’ but Aish never agreed.
R. Cohen’s decision states that Fetman took property from Aish which was proven in court that those properties were purchased prior to Fetman even working at Aish. That part of the award was struck out by the judge. The confirmation is pending an appeal.
As a recent article in the Forward states – its well known that Courts rubber stamp arbitration awards. Rabbi Greenman and his excellent attorneys took advantage of this perfectly.
G – Dan Stein letter to R Cohen 12 27 2013 Mel Zachter agreement 5 30 2014 brooklyn DA press release Jacob-Fetman-grand-larceny-indictment decision of judge demarest that aish must get me the report before the beis din session