Westhampton Faces $1 Million+ Eruv Legal Fees

WHB outside legal counsel Brian Sokoloff holds up arms in frustration. Watch full video

Westhampton Beach faces $1 million+ in legal fees if it loses the eruv battle, residents were told at a board meeting Sept. 3. Even more charges could come from winning law firm Weil, Gotshal & Manges.

BULLETIN: the Southampton Press, in its weekly print edition today, Sept. 10, quoted Robert Sugarman of WG&M as saying that SH "officially dropped opposition to the eruv in court Tuesday, Sept. 8." There has been no announcement from SH officials.

Some residents of WHB expect a similar agreement to be made with WG&M.

Brian Sokoloff, WHB outside legal counsel, answering a question by Mayor Maria Moore on the cost of the litigation, said, “Over a million dollars.”

On top of this could come fees from East End Eruv Assn. law firm WG&M, said Sokoloff, who was asked whether WG&M fees would be in addition to the million.

“Are attorney’s fees on top of Sugarman’s fees?” asked one resident, referring to Robert Sugarman, lead attorney on the eruv suit for WG&M.

Sokoloff said Sugarman works “pro bono” until the firm prevails in a civil rights case and “then he is entitled to be paid.” Sugarman bills more than $1,000 an hour. Congress in the 1970s gave legal costs to law firms who win civil rights cases as a means of encouraging such legal actions, said Sokoloff.

EEEA says the civil rights of ultra Orthodox Jews are being violated by the refusal of towns to allow eruv markers on utility poles on public property.

Sugarman told 27east.com Feb. 2, 2015 that “There has been a significant expenditure of time and numerous court fees, and we will seek to be reimbursed for those costs,” He would not give an estimate but said the costs were “not insignificant.”

WHB Wonders about Insurance Coverage

Sokoloff said WHB’s insurance is paying costs so far but he does not know about the future. “I don’t know, it’s not my bailiwick, between the insurance company as the village about who is responsible for attorney’s fees. It’s not as though, go ahead and see what happens, we have nothing to lose. I’ll say no more.”

Moore asked about legal costs facing WHB, also asking whether Southampton would be “off the hook” for such costs if its proposed settlement with the EEEA goes through. Sokoloff said he did not think attorney’s fees would be involved in the settlement.

The Southampton Council, without notice to citizens or open discussion at its meeting Aug. 25, voted to agree to the demands of the EEEA if EEEA withdraws all monetary claims. Text of this deal has yet to be seen.

Stakes High in $$ and Future of Eruvim

Pamela Sheiffer, wife of Arnold Sheiffer, chairman of Jewish People for the Betterment of Westhampton Beach, noted that EEEA has said eruvim throughout the U.S. could be toppled if the boundary is defeated in the Hamptons.

“Correct me if I’m wrong,” said Sheiffer, “but I believe Mr. Sugarman said in one of his briefs that if the court denies the eruv this could or would be a precedent for every eruvim in the U.S. coming down. It shows the difficulty of a court ruling in our favor and I am not sure this has been publicized enough.”

Sokoloff didn’t dispute what she said but held his arms out wide to signal his inability to do anything about this (at one hour, ten minutes and 20 seconds of the tape).

Sheiffer is right. The future of all eruvim is on the table as well as the towns being threatened with millions of dollars of legal fees and penalties.

Videotape Exposes Abusive Legal Tactics

The battle over eruvim in the Hamptons has put the spotlight on abuses in the legal system where the issue is being argued at great cost not only in dollars but time. The dispute is now in its fifth year.

An example of such abuses is the 55-minute dominance of Sokoloff at the Sept. 3 meeting which is available on the WHB videotape.

Jack O'Dwyer was cut off from speaking after five minutes. Pamela Sheiffer of Jewish People for the Betterment of WHB is on his left. Watch full video

We urge readers not to accept our reporting on this but go to the tape, scrolling to 17 minutes (skipping incidental WHB business). They will see Sokoloff discussing numerous legal points of the eruv dispute although WHB has been saying for months that it cannot do that because “it’s in litigation."

Sokoloff talks non-stop for 35 minutes and then dominates the podium by using another 20 minutes to answer questions. His initial speech should have been no longer than five minutes. This was mike control, pure and simple. Sokoloff never uses one word where ten will do.

The Sokoloff appearance was a last minute addition to the Sept. 3 agenda. We downloaded the agenda two days before the meeting and he was not on it. SH has pulled a similar fast one on its citizens by passing a resolution authorizing a deal with EEEA in the last few seconds of its Aug. 25 meeting.

This Reporter Tries to Speak

Viewers who scroll to 1:11 of the videotape will see this reporter stating some major truths about the dispute. WHB trustees and outside legal counsel Stephen Angel, demanding we address the board and not the video camera, cut us off after five minutes. A shouting match ensued with each side trying to outshout the other. Sokoloff got 55 minutes while we got five, we said.

The first major truth is that no court decision has acknowledged the existence of the internet which gives easy visibility to eruvim throughout the U.S., crashing claims that they are invisible.

Synagogue and other websites explain the meaning of eruvim in detail. “Reasonable” observers now know what they mean. Far from just allowing “pushing and carrying,” eruvim establish a geographical area as the “home” of believers complete with meals (a symbolic piece of bread is kept somewhere). Observant Orthodox will not move to an area without an eruv. It’s a powerful sales tool for real estate brokers who have 1,700+ homes to sell in the East End.

No. 2 is the collapse, not only of the courts on this issue, but almost all of the media. Southampton Press/27east.com has editorialized in favor of eruvim, saying they are “invisible.” Oddly, the editorial that said that gave eruvim even more visibility. SHP assigned a recent college grad, Alyssa Melillo, to the Sept. 3 meeting when it should have sent a senior reporter. Experienced SHP reporter Kyle Campbell has joined the Daily News.

The New York Times has not touched the Hamptons eruvim battle since Feb. 4, 2013. Also ducking are Newsday, New York Post, Daily News, the three TV networks, ProPublica, Politico/New York, and local media such as TV station News 12 Long Island, patch.com and The Independent. It’s time national media took note of this dispute.

Also AWOL are the libraries in WHB, SH, Quogue and Hampton Bays. None of them are “public” libraries in the strict sense of the word. They are 501/c/3 non-profit “association” libraries that must file 990 IRS tax returns. The public has no voice in the election of directors of WHB, Quogue and Hampton Bays. SH stages an election but we wonder how directors are nominated. Emails of the directors are not public record.

Susman

Susman Paper vs. Eruvim Mentioned

Sokoloff said he was aware of a law school professor at the University of Maryland, writing in a law review several years ago, “Who opined that eruvim are unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause” since they are “religious symbols on public property.”

He was referring to the 34-page essay by Prof. Alexandra Susman of the UCLA Law School who 2009 wrote the paper entitled “Strings Attached: An analysis of the Eruv under the Religious Clauses of the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.” It was written when she was at University of Maryland.

“When the eruv case came in, I found that Law Review article before anyone,” said Sokoloff. “I cited it in our motions but a law review article is nice that a professor is thinking of those things but a law review article is not the law. What the Second Circuit says is the law.”

Legal System Probe Needed

Hampton citizens need a conference on abuses in the U.S. legal system. They are victims of that system as well as the ultra-Orthodox who are using the system to press their claims. Standing idly by are most of the press, libraries, nearby universities and schools, and the local and national League of Women Voters which challenge citizens to “take action” in the face of governmental abuses.

The U.S. legal system has plenty of critics including lawyer Marion Munley of Scranton who says jury trials have about disappeared, replaced by decisions made by panels of one or three judges. The same criticism is made by the Anti-Lawyer Party which says there are now a “multitude of pre-trials for pre-trials for pre-trials benefitting the lawyers only.” "America's Corrupt Legal System," an essay by Dr Leslie Sachs, who describes himself as "an anti-corruption journalist and an American political refugee based in Europe," says the U.S. has the "world's largest prison gulag," imprisoning one of 20 working age black males.