TEMPLE BETH EL'S
KID-ISH CLUB INVITES YOU

metro

Strong Reactions To Ruling
In Bais Chabad Lawsuit

Chabad of Michigan's case against Torah Center
is reinstated by appeals court.

I David Sachs
I Senior Copy Editor

Summer Kick-Off
at our JFamily Edition

GOOD EHRBBOS
DETROIT!

Federation's JFamily and
NEXTGen Detroit are
partnering with our
synagogues to bring the
community together for
a unique family
Shabbat experience.

Friday, June 20t1

5:30 pm

Dairy Dinner

provided by Cutting Edge Cuisine

6:15 pm

Family Friendly Service and
Songs with give-a-ways!

TEMPLE BETH EL

7400 Telegraph Road
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301

Cost: $18 per adult /
$8 per child
Children 3 and under free

REGISTER AT:

jewishdetroit.org/events
Registration closes on
June 16th at noon.

Questions?
Lisa Soble Siegmann at
siegmann@jfmd.org or
248.205.2534

Event Co-Chairs:
Loren Schwartzenfeld
Forest Wolfe

effamilY NdishaUb

Jewish Federation

TEMPLE

BETH EL

16

June 5 • 2014

OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT

Alliance for Jewish Education

NEXTGen Detroit

1908730

B

oth sides have responded with
intensity to the May 22 decision
in the Michigan Court of Appeals
that reinstated Chabad of Michigan's law-
suit against the Sara and Morris Tugman
Bais Chabad Torah Center.
The Oak Park-based Chabad of
Michigan, led by
Rabbi Berel Shemtov,
is seeking the deed to
the Torah Center syna-
gogue in accordance
with what it says
are rabbinical panel
decisions claiming
Rabbi Berel
hierarchical control of
Shemtov
the West Bloomfield
congregation. The
Torah Center, led by Rabbi Elimelech
Silberberg, asserts it is a financially inde-
pendent entity and refuses to comply.
In Oakland County Circuit Court, the
Chabad of Michigan case was originally
dismissed — not on the issue of hier-
archical control — but on a statute of
limitations argument that it waited too
long to bring its lawsuit. The Court of
Appeals, however, disagreed.
Chabad of Michigan attorney Norman
Ankers of the Detroit-based law firm
Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohen
told the Jewish News on May 26, "We're
obviously pleased that the Court of
Appeals has affirmed the position that
we've taken all along.
"We are hopeful that the next step is
that Rabbi Silberberg and the congrega-
tion will honor their religious obligations
to follow the pronouncements of the
Vaad Rabbonim Lubavitch and five dif-
ferent panels of rabbinic bodies — and
we call upon them to do so for the sake of
peace and harmony in the community:'
The Torah Center has six weeks from
the Court of Appeals decision to decide
if it will appeal to the Michigan Supreme
Court. The high court picks and chooses
which cases it will take up. If an appeal
is not heard in the state Supreme Court,
the case goes back to the trial court for a
full determination on its merits.
In reversing the dismissal of the
case on the statute of limitations
claim, the Court of Appeals opin-
ion noted that whether Chabad of
Michigan had hierarchical control
over the Torah Center was a question
of fact for the trial court to determine.

Torah Center Responds
On May 27, the Torah Center issued a
statement reacting to the ruling:
"The Torah Center, its board and
Rabbi Silberberg are disappointed
with the recent decision of the
Michigan Court of Appeals.
"This decision
guarantees that the
secular lawsuit filed
by Chabad Lubavitch
of Michigan over
ownership of the
Torah Center's prop-
erty will continue
for years to come in
Rabbi
Michigan's appellate
Elimelech
and/or trial courts.
Silberberg
"It does so even
though the Vaad of Lubavitch Rabbis
specifically stated in 2008 and 2012
that there is no permission from the
Vaad to file a secular lawsuit against
the Torah Center or its board concern-
ing the property:'
The Torah Center noted that the
Court of Appeals opinion made note
of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe's state-
ments that "each institution should
be autonomous"; "the leaders of
Chabad-Lubavitch are there just to
give advice, not to control individual
congregations"; and "it is well known
that the various Chabad institutions are
financially completely independent of
our central office:'
The Torah Center statement said,
"The court also highlighted that a guid-
ance written on behalf of the Rebbe
states that individual institutions must
deal with their own finances; Chabad
Lubavitch of Michigan instructed local
Chabad houses to incorporate sepa-
rately and to hold property indepen-
dently because it did not want legal or
financial responsibility for any property
owned by separate shluchim [emis-
saries]; and several other Chabad con-
gregations in Michigan own their own
property:'
The statement continued, "In light
of the Rebbe's logical and wise direc-
tives, Chabad Lubavitch of Michigan
should simply drop its secular lawsuit,
instead of forcing the Torah Center,
its board and Rabbi Silberberg to keep
litigating what is clear — the Torah
Center should own and does own its
own property that it bought, built and
has maintained on its own for many
decades:'

Chabad's Point Of View
Ankers, on behalf of Chabad of
Michigan, disputes this interpretation
of the Rebbe's thoughts. "It has nothing
to do with the hierarchical argument:'
he said.
"I'll give you an example by analogy.
Look at the Roman Catholic Church,
which everyone acknowledges is hier-
archical ... Parishes are required to be
financially autonomous. If they're not
financially autonomous, the mother
church is not going to step in and give
them a lot of money. If they can't pull
their own weight, they close or the situ-
ation changes. It doesn't make them any
less hierarchical.
"Financial autonomy with respect to
individual congregations is simply a
good practice for any congregation, and
it doesn't address the issue of hierarchy
at all:' Anker said.
The Torah Center, however, contends
that "the court's ruling does not bring
Chabad Lubavitch of Michigan any
closer to winning on the merits in secu-
lar court. It simply holds that the Torah
Center, its board and Rabbi Silberberg
do not get to win right away as they did
the first time around in the secular trial
court.
"The Rebbe's directives are crystal
clear that institutions like the Torah
Center should own their own property.
Yet, Chabad Lubavitch of Michigan
continues to pursue the opposite result
against the Torah Center, thereby
wasting the precious and scarce time,
money and resources of our local
Jewish community on secular court
proceedings:'
Attorney Ankers disputes this. "So
long as a religious body is hierarchical,
there is very, very little opportunity for
the secular courts to do anything other
than to enforce what the hierarchy
decreed. And here, the hierarchy has
made clear what its decree is.
"As we said, we are calling upon the
rabbi and the congregation to honor
their religious obligations, which have
been decreed on any number of occa-
sions:'
When asked if there was any room
for negotiations with the Torah Center,
Ankers said, "I haven't thought about
the issue of negotiations. I think the
directives that have been issued are
clear, and whether there are subsequent
discussions between the parties, time
will tell:'

❑