Bayside Cemetery Litigation

Update on Bayside Cemetery Litigation - December 4, 2011

2011-12-05T02:56:38Z

Dear Bayside Cemetery Litigation Friends and Supporters:

It has been quite a while since I wrote an update on my efforts to get the situation and conditions at Bayside Cemetery remediated and to force Congregation Shaare Zedek to restore the misappropriated cemetery monies they were responsible for (and admitted to mismanaging) and to honor the hundreds (maybe thousands) of perpetual care contracts that they sold over many years. Again, the amount of missing money in question here is between $5 million to $10 million – a lot of money to disappear! Sums like this are what books and movies are made about!

The cases of Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery and Community Association of Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries (“Lucker”) as well as Leventhal vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery and Community Association of Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries (“Leventhal”) continue. It has now been over 4 years since the Lucker case was originally filed. And it has been 10 months since the Leventhal case was filed.

To date, the Lucker case has weaved through Federal Court and is now in NY Supreme Court with a venue destination to be changed and the Leventhal case is in NY Supreme Court.

Before I update you on the legal cases, I want to encourage you to read the recent press reports about Bayside Cemetery and the court documents for the Lucker and Leventhal cases.

In the videos on the front page of my website you will see news about some disrespectful grave desecration and neglect at Bayside Cemetery as well as a blatant lack of accountability shown by Congregation Shaare Zedek – truly some unacceptable conduct and actions!

Go to www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com and look at the new videos on the front page of the website (from WABC, WPIX and from a cemetery visitor).

Also read the recent press reports in the Article Archive http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/Article_Archive.html

And read the recent legal case documents in http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/About_the_Litigation.html.

Now to news about the court cases…

As a person who has never been involved in a legal dispute before, the excruciatingly slow pace of the legal system has been a learning experience for me. Also new to me is the lack of timeliness, thoroughness, accuracy, accountability and general common sense in some of the processes within our legal system. It used to be a citizen could rely on the letter of the law and inherent fairness but perhaps not always the spirit of the law. But in this case, it appears that I can’t even rely on the letter or fairness of the law.

Shockingly on September 15, 2011, after the Lucker case sat stagnating in her court’s docket for two years, Judge Debra James granted defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Lucker case.

Her dismissal was predicated on her determination of a lack of standing by the several plaintiffs – although very oddly Judge James was silent on the specifics on my personal standing status – a standing status which unarguably exists for me which she herself acknowledged in the ruling by stating that administrators of an estate have standing.

However, Judge James made several serious and obvious mistakes in her decision – all extraordinarily appealable – which are inherently simple and obvious mistakes and oversights and seem to have evolved from her lack of careful review of the documents submitted in the case despite her having almost two years to do so. Judge James seemed to miss cited legal precedent that prior legal representatives of deceased people have standing in cases like this one and Judge James completely missed the fact the I possess letters of administration (which were filed with the Lucker case) from Connecticut Probate Court to represent my deceased grandmother’s contractual interests for perpetual care at Bayside Cemetery. See the document at:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Affadavit_Michael_Buchman-Lucker_Probate_Fiduciary.pdf

It’s impossible for the judge to say that I don’t have legal standing when the Probate Court specifically appointed me to represent my deceased grandmother’s interests at Bayside Cemetery. For the purposes of the case with these probate papers, I am my grandmother.

The judge also makes several statements in her ruling that are not consistent with legal rules that require, in a motion to dismiss, consideration to be limited to information and statements contained solely within the “Four Corners” of the complaint – the “Four Corners” principal is a foundational legal concept. Yet the judge makes statements about how the NY State Attorney General has standing to pursue this matter on behalf of plaintiffs, that the NY AG has begun an investigation, and the NY AG is overseeing negotiations to find a sustainable solution to the maintenance of Bayside Cemetery. It is nonsensical to contemplate what relevance the actions of the NY AG have to do with my grandmother’s legal rights as the beneficiary of a perpetual care contract with Congregation Shaare Zedek. In addition, the court’s statements and the reliance on the NY AG by the judge are not within the four corners of the complaint and may have bled into her thinking from statements made by defendants – statements which the judge has not validated through discovery or received on the record.

In fact, subsequent to her decision, my attorney Michael Buchman questioned the statements in the decision with the NY State Attorney General’s office as there was concern that the defendant was making statements on and off the record to the court that the NY AG was supportive and seemingly endorsing certain negotiations between Congregation Shaare Zedek and the NY AG’s office. Apparently the NY AG reacted very negatively to Congregation Shaare Zedek’s actions and the NY AG contacted a defendant attorney and demanded that the defendants retract statements made to the judge and the court about the NY AG’s support of the matter. This drama resulted in the defendant’s attorney writing a highly unusual letter to Judge James dated October 10, 2011 retracting their misrepresentative statements from filed documents about the NY AG’s support:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Defendant-Steinthal-Letter_Admitting_Misrepresentation-Oct_10_2011.pdf

Of course, since the judge had already made her decision, this retraction of statements made on the record are of little consolation other than proving, once again, the lengths to which Congregation Shaare Zedek will go to obfuscate and fabricate the facts and issues in their neglect of Bayside Cemetery and their misappropriation of the cemetery’s funds.

My attorney, Michael Buchman, then wrote the following letter to Judge James to inquire about her position given the misrepresentations made to her by the defendants. But to date he has received no response from the court:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Hon._James_Letter_10-11-2011.pdf

In the above letter, my attorney Michael Buchman concludes that “[a failure to right this wrong by defendants would] make these morally bankrupt and admittedly culpable Defendants free to continue to steal and lie with impunity. And it would impose a grave injustice upon Plaintiffs while sending the wrong message to other entities managing perpetual care funds in the State of New York”.

Also, keep in mind that the NY State AG has been investigating the Bayside Cemetery matter for almost seven (7) years – through the Spitzer, Cuomo and now Schneiderman administrations with no conclusions and no civil or criminal actions taken. It is unreasonable for a law enforcement agency to fail to take action for a significant financial crime of the theft of between $5-10 million. Why does the NY AG continue to do nothing? I must speculate that it must be a result of political influence from parties involved with the congregation or the NY UJA because the NY AG has investigated and resolved hundreds of matters in the past 7 years, many of which involved a lot less money than the issues at Bayside Cemetery. I, and some reporters, have submitted Freedom of Information requests to the NY AG about this matter and our requests have repeatedly been denied with the statement that this is an ongoing investigation – ongoing for 7 years?

So, what’s going on with the Lucker case given this erroneous court decision? On October 27, 2011 a Notice of Appeal Preargument Statement was filed to notify the court that an appeal will be filed for the dismissal and the reasons why we believe the decision was wrong. You can read this appeal notification at:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Notice_of_Appeal_Preargument_Statement__00015927_.PDF

It is important to note that no decision has been made on the Motion to Dismiss on the Leventhal case yet. Judge James should find it difficult to rule that Leventhal doesn’t have standing considering Plaintiff Leventhal was the actual purchaser of the perpetual care contract with Congregation Shaare Zedek. But with the way the various courts have been handling the Bayside Cemetery matter to date, it appears that anything is possible – regardless of facts or common sense. It does make me wonder why a case that is so straight forward has been so difficult – is it all about politics versus the law? How much political influence does Congregation Shaare Zedek and Bayside Cemetery have? Enough power to allow this gross miscarriage of justice to continue apparently.

It is clearly distressing to be on the receiving end of a judicial error and then have to incur significant additional time, effort and expense to file an appeal for an erroneous decision.

For some public comments about Judge Debra James from attorneys who allegedly interacted with her on legal cases in her court, read here. Not a very flattering array of commentary:

http://www.therobingroom.com/newyork/Judge.aspx?ID=552#10282

http://www.therobingroom.com/newyork/JudgeDetail.aspx?ID=552

We as plaintiffs now have a number of months to draft and perfect our appeal and we will work hard to prepare and file the necessary documents.

So the Lucker case now moves to the NY State Court of Appeals… the third court this straight forward case finds itself in.

In a recent judicial decision in US District Court, Judge Jed Rakoff ruled on a case of a completely different kind but he made a statement which I think has great applicability in this case about Bayside Cemetery and how Judge James failed to properly handle this case and rule with thoroughness and diligence. Judge Rakoff said “An application of judicial power that does not rest on facts is worse than mindless, it is inherently dangerous. […] If [the court’s actions] does not rest on facts – cold, hard, solid facts, established either by admissions or by trials – it serves no lawful or moral purpose and is simply an engine of oppression.”

In the Lucker case, I feel that the court has acted irresponsibly and carelessly and I am confident that I will prevail on appeal. The mere fact that Judge James ignored my definitive appointment as a legal representative for my deceased grandmother is evidence enough but the appeal will detail more of the judge’s errors and omissions.

In addition, we wait impatiently for a decision in the Leventhal case – a case where standing is undeniable with a plaintiff who directly purchased a perpetual care contract from Congregation Shaare Zedek.

This experience is teaching me many things, one of which I hope is that good things come to those who wait. But I had no idea it would take this long nor make me jump over this many hurdles to right such an obvious wrong. As the 1990 song by the band EMF cried repeatedly … Unbelievable!

Respectfully,

John Lucker

Plaintiff

Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery, and Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries

www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com

Update on Bayside Cemetery Litigation - Feb 5 2011

2011-02-05T21:43:00Z

Dear Bayside Cemetery Litigation Friends and Supporters:

I just wanted to write you a brief email to update you on an important development in the efforts to get the situation at Bayside Cemetery remedied. There has also been some interesting press coverage for you to read about.

On January 13, 2011 an additional class action lawsuit was filed by a gentleman named Steven Leventhal who, in 1985, had personally purchased a Perpetual Care contract for family graves at Bayside Cemetery from Congregation Shaare Zedek. Similar to my lawsuit, this lawsuit names Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery, and the Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries, Inc (CAJAC) as co-defendants. This new lawsuit can be read by Clicking Here. Other subsequent documents filed with the court after this lawsuit was filed can be reviewed by Clicking Here.

With this new “Leventhal” lawsuit and the original “Lucker” lawsuit, the defendants are faced with a diversity of plaintiffs and circumstances where Perpetual Care contracts were purchased. Law and precedent strongly support all of the circumstances for these suits’ Perpetual Care contracts and the standing of all plaintiffs. As a result, it is inconceivable to me how the defendants can avoid doing the right thing for Bayside Cemetery and ensure that the cemetery is remediated, enhanced, funded and professionally managed in perpetuity as the purchasers of Perpetual Care contracted for.

You can also read through two recent articles about Bayside Cemetery by clicking here: Article 1 and Article 2.

As always I will keep you informed of ongoing developments in the Bayside Cemetery matter.

Feel free to email me for more information or for questions or comments.

Respectfully,

John Lucker
Plaintiff
Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery, and Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries

www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com

Corrections & Additions to Queens Chronicle Article about Bayside Cemetery

2011-01-03T20:39:00Z

This email was sent to the Queens Chronicle on December 31, 2010:

******** EMAIL Follows **********

In the recent article “Respecting the Dead at Bayside” dated 12/23/2010 (http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=20453046&BRD=2731&PAG=461&dept_id=574908&rfi=8 ), I was disappointed to see the Queens Chronicle publish an article that was based on insufficient research. I am the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit “Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery and Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries” which was filed in NY State Supreme Court on October 22, 2009. The lawsuit and all related material are available on the Internet at www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com. This lawsuit is the second lawsuit filed as the first lawsuit was dismissed for federal jurisdictional reasons from Federal court. The Queens Chronicle reporter unfortunately did not capture both sides of the Bayside Cemetery matter.

Here are some additional corrections and facts regarding Bayside Cemetery from the article:

* The original Federal lawsuit was filed on Sept 12, 2007 and not in 2008 as reported in the article.

* The Federal lawsuit was dismissed on Sept 30, 2009 on class action jurisdictional grounds but was re-filed on October 22, 2009 in NY State Supreme Court. It remains an active lawsuit to this day with the addition of Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries (CAJAC) as a Co-Defendant.

* The article incorrectly reported the name of CAJAC. CAJAC stands for the “Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries”.

* The article reports that the condition of Bayside Cemetery was “not the fault of Congregation Shaare Zedek, which did not have the means to continue its upkeep”. From my perspective this statement is absolutely untrue. Congregation Shaare Zedek was paid by hundreds, and potentially thousands, of families for Perpetual Care at the cemetery and the congregation wrote contracts for that perpetual care. Many of these documents have been disclosed by the synagogue during the lawsuit. Up until recent years, the congregation was selling these maintenance contracts and the synagogue was paid for maintenance and perpetual care of graves at Bayside Cemetery. Therefore, the neglect and disrespect on display at the cemetery is clearly the fault of Congregation Shaare Zedek. The congregation has even admitted in the media that they used monies paid for cemetery care for other purposes at the synagogue – which is an improper, and potentially illegal, use of trust fund money paid for cemetery perpetual care.

* The article continues by reporting the words of the CAJAC director who gives a history lesson of sorts about how the congregation “sold parts of the property to various organizations or individuals” for burial. This is not how it works when someone buys a burial plot. When a burial plot is sold, a person, family, or burial society buys the right to use a piece of the cemetery for a burial. A real estate transaction does not take place. The owner of the cemetery, in this case the congregation, continues to be the owner of the cemetery and continues to own the plot of land to be used for burial. Any statements about how other people or burial societies bought parts of the cemetery are not true.

* If the congregation were to claim that they sold the property to people for burials, then why did the congregation sell perpetual care contracts for those same plots? How could they sell such contracts for property that they also claim they don’t own? The congregation took people’s money and issued a contract with a promise to maintain the property forever. This is not a fact that can be disputed. I have copies of many of these contracts and some are filed as exhibits in the lawsuit posted on www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com.

* It seems curious that CAJAC states “[once Bayside Cemetery is cleaned up] CAJAC’s role will be to ensure the long-term maintenance of the cemetery”. Why would CAJAC assume this responsibility when Congregation Shaare Zedek owns Bayside Cemetery and is financially responsible for maintaining the cemetery and has been paid for Perpetual Care services at the cemetery?

In summary, there are considerable facts and information that would have made this Queens Chronicle article more factually and contextually correct. I hope that for the next article about Bayside Cemetery, the Queens Chronicle will contact me for additional information about this very important moral, ethical and legal matter.

Respectfully,

John Lucker

Simsbury, CT

Update on Bayside Cemetery Litigation – December 29, 2010

2010-12-31T22:29:00Z

Dear Bayside Cemetery Litigation Friends and Supporters:

It has been quite some time since I last emailed you about the status of my Bayside Cemetery Litigation. Unfortunately there is little progress to report but I remain optimistic about the future for the matter.

Recently, I celebrated the third anniversary of my litigation against Congregation Shaare Zedek (CSZ), Bayside Cemetery (Bayside), and the Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries (CAJAC) which is an alter-ego offshoot of CSZ. While considerable media attention has been paid over the past three years to the Bayside Cemetery atrocities, shockingly little has happened through the legal system to have the right things happen. The cemetery continues to be an absolute mess and in violation of the Jewish law of Kavod Hamet – Honoring the Deceased.

In fact, when I visited Bayside Cemetery on September 1, 2010, I observed a mausoleum that has not been maintained by the Congregation and I saw, through a very large open hole in the wall, exposed human bones lying on the floor of the building! I also saw a staggering amount of debris and trash strewn all around the cemetery.

Pictures from my fall visit to Bayside Cemetery are available at

http://photos.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/GallerySlideshow.aspx?gallery=498623

Congregation Shaare Zedek continues to neglect Bayside Cemetery, fails to restore the cemetery’s monies, does not comply with requests for a full public and validated independent accounting of the cemetery’s past and present records and disregards the creation of an ongoing plan to manage and honor the perpetual care contracts that hundreds, or potentially thousands, of the cemetery’s deceased paid for.

In my last update I informed you that in late 2009 the lawsuit was re-filed in New York State Supreme Court and we had a hearing on June 3, 2010 for the new judge to hear the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. This process is routine in lawsuits. We are now waiting for the judge’s decision on the Motion to Dismiss. Regardless of the decision, new parties have come forward with additional circumstances so the case will continue. We are not going to go away until the right thing is done for our ancestors at Bayside Cemetery.

For those of you following these issues, I know it is difficult to remain patient. Our dead loved ones require our patience - my grandmother had been buried there for 23 years and my grandfather for nearly 40 years. But to me, the sins at Bayside Cemetery are so numerous and the ethical and moral violations by Congregation Shaare Zedek are so deplorable and unconscionable that we must remain patient so that eventually the right thing can happen.

On a separate thread, the NY Attorney General’s Office has been investigating the Bayside Cemetery matter for about seven years now with no public disclosure of their results to date. The State of NY has had two AG’s since this case began – oddly there have been hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of other matters that have been investigated and resolved by the AG’s office in the past seven years – cases that affect all aspects of living society. Apparently the rights of the dead are of less interest to the AG’s office. If the rights of the dead were important to the AG, the right thing would have been done by now and Bayside Cemetery would be 100% cleaned up, the cemetery monies would be restored in proper trust funds, the perpetual care contracts would be honored and a viable permanent management plan for Bayside Cemetery would be in place.

Some who have been following the Bayside Cemetery matter have commented that CAJAC has in fact been cleaning up the cemetery. It is true that CAJAC has done work to cleanup a portion of Bayside Cemetery through weekend volunteer efforts and a small grant from the UJA Federation of NY. But as my pictures from September 1, 2010 show, there is a massive amount of work still to be done. And of course every Spring brings a new growing season – this is a battle of man versus nature – all the reason why a permanent management plan needs to be in place.

To me, the real issue is not to only do a one-time cleanup but rather to restore the monies of the cemetery and establish the necessary funding and a management plan for continuous permanent cemetery maintenance which is what all the people paid for when they bought Perpetual Care Contracts from Congregation Shaare Zedek.

I also want to emphasize several points, correct a few continuous misstatements from the media and disclose a few facts:

* CAJAC is a volunteer group and does not own Bayside Cemetery. CAJAC morphed from an organization started by Congregation Shaare Zedek and was originally called Friends of Bayside Cemetery. Until recently, CAJAC’s address was that of CSZ and was created by CSZ Board members. As of their last 501(c)3 financial disclosure, CAJAC had virtually no assets.

* As of the date of this writing, CAJAC appears to have assumed maintenance and management responsibility for Bayside Cemetery. It is not clear what if any effort the Congregation is making to fulfill their responsibility to their cemetery. I have heard that the congregation recently fired both maintenance workers at the cemetery claiming they couldn’t afford them and CAJAC was going to handle Bayside Cemetery matters. The cemetery no longer appears to be open to the public. One person called me recently to report that they tried to arrange a visit to the cemetery and had to do so via the landscaper that CAJAC has on call for the cemetery. I don’t believe the person was able to arrange the visit to the cemetery. When I called the cemetery, I got an answering machine message to call the Congregation for routine matters but to call the landscaper, presumably hired by CAJAC, for emergencies. It is not clear if Bayside Cemetery maintains hours for visitors.

* A recent article in the Queens Chronicle about Bayside Cemetery couldn’t have gotten more things wrong. Clearly they only spoke to CAJAC; they never contacted me to discuss the case. Despite what the article says, (1) the case has NOT been dismissed and become defunct but rather was re-filed in NY State Supreme Court in late 2009; (2) despite what CAJAC claims as they defend the congregation in the media, the condition of Bayside Cemetery is entirely the fault of Congregation Shaare Zedek – the congregation has admitted to improperly, and potentially illegally, misusing the cemetery funds for their own purposes and the results of their neglect at the cemetery are plain and obvious; (3) burial plots at the cemetery were not sold to burial societies like a real estate transaction – the congregation has always continued to own the cemetery and the congregation continued to sell perpetual care contracts until recent years. The congregation took the money from the “customers” but has failed to honor their contracts. When someone buys a burial plot, they don’t buy land but rather they buy the right to use the plot for a burial. The physical property continues to be owned by the cemetery’s landowner, in this case Congregation Shaare Zedek. That’s why the congregation sold annual and perpetual care contracts to “customers”.

I want to ask you all to please get more active calling and writing the media to focus more attention to the outrageous conduct of Congregation Shaare Zedek at Bayside Cemetery and to not allow CAJAC to obfuscate the real issues of the Bayside Cemetery matter. The congregation, and CAJAC if appropriate, must be held accountable for the misdeeds at Bayside Cemetery. It hasn’t been too long since Congregation Shaare Zedek took people’s money for Perpetual Care contracts – money that the Congregation admitted using for purposes other than the cemetery – and then they ignored their obligations to maintain the cemetery as they were paid to do. Please do your part to draw attention to this wrong by speaking with the media, religious leaders, politicians, law enforcement, the NY Attorney General, the NY Health Department, etc. - anyone who will listen and help.

Feel free to email me for more information or for questions and comments.

Respectfully,

John Lucker

Plaintiff

Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery, and Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries

www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com

Open Letter to the Worldwide Jewish Community about Bayside Cemetery

2009-12-31T15:23:00Z

An Open Letter to the Worldwide Jewish Community

About the Desecration of Bayside Cemetery, Ozone Park, NY

Perpetrated By Congregation Shaare Zedek

Bayside Cemetery Litigation

http://www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com

The definition of “desecration” – to treat with sacrilege or profanity, to defile, to dishonor, blasphemy

Jewish tradition is very clear… Kavod Hamet… Respect for the dead is a sacrosanct tenet of the Jewish faith.

In this open letter to all Jewish people worldwide, I am providing information about an issue that needs to be more widely discussed and remedied - because a great shame has fallen on the New York City Jewish community at a time when other disgraceful events have occurred and been widely publicized. Yet this shanda is one that the community can fix.

My grandparents, Harry & Ruth Lucker (and many more unrelated decedents), paid for and signed perpetual care and annual care contracts with Congregation Shaare Zedek in Manhattan for their graves at Bayside Cemetery – contracts which Congregation Shaare Zedek has admitted to the New York State Attorney General it breached by invading cemetery trust monies and improperly using the monies for their own synagogue. As a direct and proximate result, Congregation Shaare Zedek has not been maintaining the cemetery claiming that they have no funds. Bayside Cemetery is 13+ acres with 34,000 graves. The cemetery looks like a rainforest yet it is right in the center of Queens, in New York City, the home of the second largest Jewish population in the world.

In September 2007 I filed a class action lawsuit in US federal court naming Congregation Shaare Zedek at 212 West 93^rd Street in Manhattan and their Bayside Cemetery in Ozone Park, Queens as defendants. After 2 years, the case was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds as the federal court believes this matter properly belongs in state court. In October 2009, I re-filed my lawsuit in the Supreme Court of New York State and named the Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries (CAJAC) as an additional defendant.

I am suing the synagogue for the horrendous and disrespectful desecration of Bayside Cemetery, their non-performance of their contractual obligations, and for the statements they have publicly made admitting to co-mingling the cemetery’s funds with those of the synagogue and subsequently using the cemetery’s funds for the benefit of the congregation in violation of trust and fiduciary law. I seek no personal gain from this lawsuit; rather I have been left with no alternative because of the lack of any viable response, action and long-term plan from the synagogue. I simply want the synagogue to honor its commitments, both contractual and moral, to those who are interred in the cemetery, to their families and to the greater Jewish community.

As a result of the synagogue’s unlawful conduct, Bayside Cemetery has fallen into complete and total disrepair with wild vegetation, grave desecration, recurring vandalism of graves and mausoleums, exposed human remains, and endless excuses from the congregation for why they have allowed the cemetery to disintegrate. There has been little or no effort by the synagogue to repair or return these gravesites to their original or even a broadly acceptable state. Rather, there has been a long, meandering effort by the synagogue to alternatively deny responsibility and delay any efforts to correct this horrendous wrong.

The details of my lawsuit, along with significant information about the situation at Bayside Cemetery, a library of genealogical records for many thousands of people buried at the cemetery and hundreds of pictures of the horrific and disrespectful condition of Bayside Cemetery can be found at http://www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com.

But the purpose of this letter is not to detail or rehash the 2+ years of legal proceedings pertaining to my case as I have faith that the legal system will provide justice in due course. Rather I feel compelled to ask some of the following questions:

Why is the NYC Jewish Community turning a blind-eye to Congregation Shaare Zedek’s theft of perpetual care monies which has resulted in the desecration of 34,000 graves?

Why are we unwilling to fully enforce one of our primary commandments “thou shall not steal” within our own community and what message will it send that we refuse to self-police within our own community?

How can the UJA Federation of New York, the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York and other Jewish Organizations condone Congregation Shaare Zedek’s conduct, prevent full disclosure concerning the stolen monies and seek to protect Congregation Shaare Zedek from full scrutiny for its actions?

How can the rabbi and members of Congregation Shaare Zedek daven under a roof that has been maintained using stolen monies? How can they recite the mourners Kaddish at Sabbath services and pay homage to the deceased when their synagogue so severely disrespects those at their cemetery (including deceased members of Congregation Shaare Zedek)?

Have recent scandals and events in the Jewish community made us so numb that we are no longer surprised by anything including the theft of monies by a synagogue from its own cemetery?

These are only a few of the questions that need to be asked and answered. But the only way that the wrongs at Bayside Cemetery can be righted, and this shame on the Jewish Community lifted, is if everyone who learns about this situation gets involved and speaks out.

So please go to http://www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com to learn more. And then email, write and/or call every New York City Jewish organization, synagogue, newspaper, magazine, TV/radio station, national TV news show, rabbi, UJA official, politician, government official, the NY State Attorney General, Social Justice Director or anyone or any group you can think of to let them know that you think that Bayside Cemetery is a complete disgrace and that Congregation Shaare Zedek needs to fully disclose its wrong doing, conduct a formal forensic accounting for the cemetery’s former and current monies, clean-up the cemetery and fund the cemetery for permanent perpetual care which is what the thousands of people buried there paid for.

Please get involved. You can make Congregation Shaare Zedek accountable for their moral, ethical and legal violations and compel them to restore and maintain their cemetery now and in the future.

The Jewish Community must hold its own people accountable when wrongs are committed. This is a wrong that must be righted – because Kavod Hamet is what we all must do. If we do not respect our ancestors, our most sacred duty, what is our legacy as a people and a community? Won’t you please join me in this worthy endeavor?

With Deep Respect,

John Lucker, Plaintiff, Simsbury, CT – www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com

Lucker et al vs. Congregation Shaare Zedek, Bayside Cemetery, and Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries

Update on Bayside Cemetery Litigation – October 22, 2009

2009-10-23T02:38:00Z

Dear Bayside Cemetery Litigation Friends:

Phew. It’s been a whirlwind few months since I last wrote to you. There is much to bring you up to date on - some of it good and some of it not so good – or at most frustrating.

So let me start with the frustrating news and then I will tell you the encouraging news.

Frustrating News: Chief Judge Dearie of the federal court where my lawsuit had been filed, dismissed my lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds and sent me to NY State Court. Two years wasted. He kind of apologized for it in the dismissal order and admitted that Bayside Cemetery was in horrible condition but he claimed he didn’t have jurisdiction over the case. Oddly it took him two years to figure this out. Oddly he had promised me personally to expedite the case. My read of this is that he’s busy and he didn’t think my case was worth his time. Federal judges are important people and a disrespected desecrated Jewish cemetery owned by a synagogue that misappropriated the cemetery’s money may not be the kind of case that some chief judge wants to deal with - not when Chief Judge Dearie gets to work on exciting cases like the Denver terrorist trial (Najibullah Zazi). (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202434182416&NY_Federal_Court_Braces_for_Trial_of_Terror_Suspect )

To see some articles about this event, go to:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/NY_Daily_News-Jurisdiction_Dismissal-Oct_22_2009.pdf

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Queens_Chronicle-Cemetery_Cleanup_Needs_Volunteers-Oct_22_2009.pdf

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/Jeshiva_World_News-Judge_Throws_Out_Lawsuit_Against_Jewish_Cemetery-Oct_22_2009.pdf

And the judge’s order can be read at:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/AR-M620N_20091006_051528.pdf

The judge’s apology, such as it is, reads as “As the Court has noted from the outset of these proceedings, all agree that Bayside Cemetery’s state of decay and disrepair is disheartening and in need of a prompt repair. As unfortunate as this lingering dispute is, and fully appreciating the frustration and anger of the affected families, the Court must conclude that it is without jurisdiction to act.” So there you go… 2 years after the lawsuit was filed. That’s a long time to wait to have a judge decide he shouldn’t be hearing the case (regardless of the merits of his decision).

I was recently interviewed by a reporter about this development in the case and I prepared some written comments for him that I thought I would share with you all:

“I’m deeply disappointed that Chief Judge Dearie did not follow through with his personal, on-the-record, promise to me to expedite this case to trial after I agreed, at the judge’s request, on two separate occasions to temporarily delay the case for a total of 9 months. After 2 years of judicial delays, Chief Judge Dearie concocted a reason to dismiss the case from Federal Court when neither party asked for a jurisdictional review and both parties agreed or relented that the court had the necessary jurisdiction based on evidence and expert witness reports. Chief Judge Dearie clearly did not seem to want to work on this Bayside Cemetery case.

In the meantime Bayside Cemetery continues to be in a horrific disgraceful condition and Congregation Shaare Zedek continues to not be held accountable for their misappropriation of the cemetery’s monies – all in total disrespect of the memories of the 35,000 Jewish people buried there.

Also, the NY Attorney General’s Office continues their 6+ year investigation (under two administrations) of this matter without a publicly disclosed resolution or enforcement – this mystifies me as the AG’s office routinely investigates and prosecutes much less complex cases in months, not years. I have asked the AG’s office, as have other concerned citizens, what’s taking so long? We have been told that the investigation is ongoing.

As a result of Chief Judge Dearie’s ruling, I will soon be filing the class action lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of NY with additional defendants named.”

If you want more legal background on what led up to this event, goto http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/About_the_Litigation.html and read the documents from my last email to you on August 18 until the current time.

So Now The Encouraging News: Far be it for me and my attorney Michael Buchman to let adversity get to us! On October 21, 2009 we refiled the class action lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of NY. We have redrafted portions of the lawsuit and we have also added CAJAC (Community Association for Jewish At-Risk Cemeteries) as a co-defendant. You can read the suit at:

http://site.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/uploads/AR-M620N_20091022_043220.pdf

I will not allow the defendants to stall and delay the case like they did in federal court. I am particularly galvanized on this after visiting Bayside Cemetery last week.

My Visit to Bayside Cemetery on October 13, 2009: I wrote to you a few months ago that CAJAC, as an apparent arm of Congregation Shaare Zedek, was doing a one-time cleanup of Bayside Cemetery. Their cleanup was being performed without a permanent recurring plan to ensure that the cemetery stays clean each year after.

CAJAC has made grandiose statements and has publicly communicated plans that they would complete the cleanup of Bayside Cemetery by November 2009. Well tick tock… because they’ve got 2 weeks to complete a project that isn’t probably 15-20% completed. When I visited the cemetery and spoke with some area people who watch what goes on at the cemetery, I learned that the landscaper who was contracted by CAJAC to cleanup the cemetery hasn’t done much of anything for nearly two months.

The cemetery is an absolute mess. In some ways it’s worse than it was before the cleanup in many parts of the cemetery. Vast quantities of debris are strewn everywhere both in piles and just randomly laying everywhere. Piles of wood chips cover graves. Mountains of brush and twigs lay decaying; the cut branches are brown and dead showing how long they have been there since they were cut down. Areas where the invasive Chinese Bamboo weed was cut down are growing back (as the bamboo will grow back quickly if not chemically killed) and it is already 2 feet tall since being cut. Trees have been cut down and the fallen timbers lay across graves and stones. Trash is strewn throughout the cemetery. Small trees and shrubs were cut down but not chemically treated so they are already growing back. Plus some of the trees that were cut down were cut within a few inches of the ground rather than removed below the ground and chemically treated and the weeds have grown over the stumps so the cemetery is one giant tripping hazard. Basically the place is barely better off than it was before the cleanup. The cleanup seems to have done more to clear the way for new growth this year and ongoing years. If this is a professional cleanup, I’d like to see the contractor’s credentials!

And interestingly, my family’s burial Gate 19 looks no different than it did two years ago. It is still a mess, uncared for and overgrown despite the Perpetual Care contract that my grandparent’s burial society purchased and the Congregation acknowledged existed in the papers they provided in the earlier federal lawsuit.

So the reasons for my lawsuit are even stronger than before. My family has perpetual care and we’re not getting any care!

To see my pictures from my October 13^th visit to the cemetery, goto http://photos.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/GallerySlideshow.aspx?gallery=267916

I think that about updates you on the latest news about my lawsuit.

As always, please visit my website for the latest news and information:

Go To: http://www.baysidecemeterylitigation.com/

Sincerely,

John Lucker, Plaintiff