The Sara and Morris Tugman Bais Chabad Torah Center in West Bloomfield, MI.

Court: Head Shliach’s Lawsuit Can Go Forward

Rabbi Berel Shemtov, head Shliach of Michigan, won a small victory in a state appeals court last Thursday, when the judges overturned a lower court’s dismissal of his lawsuit against the Chabad Torah Center in West Bloomfield, led by Rabbi Elimelech Silberberg. The lawsuit has been reinstated and can now go forward.

From the Detroit Jewish News:

Chabad of Michigan’s lawsuit against the Sara and Morris Tugman Bais Chabad Torah Center in West Bloomfield is alive and well.

The Michigan Court of Appeals, sitting in Lansing, ruled that Judge Rae Lea Chabot’s dismissal of Oak Park-based Chabad of Michigan’s case in Oakland County Circuit Court was wrong.

The appeals court’s decision, rendered May 22, examined Judge Chabot’s dismissal of the case without a trial on the grounds that Chabad of Michigan waited too long to file the suit under the state’s statute of limitations.

The Court of Appeals reversed that decision, holding that the case was not filed late because the deadline was suspended during prior hearings in the rabbinic court or “bet din.”

Continue reading at the Detroit Jewish News.

135 Comments

  • To Ch.info

    Why would u put up such an article showing on political issues that are occurring in lubavitch!?

  • Wow

    What an article! Is this even news worthy? anyone reads this without pain in his heart, is someone who thrives on Machlokes and Loshon Hara…

  • Disgusted

    Why would you post such news. Its just gossip and nasty bitter useless hatred, and during Sefira?

    “The lawsuit has been reinstated and can now go forward.”

    Really??? Supporting a lawsuit like this. Its a Shanda

  • Non Crown Heightser

    Mazal tov. Two shluchim fighting in state court. They should be continue to give the Rebbe much nachas.

  • WHAT?!?!

    Shliach taking another shliach to a goyishe court? This is Chabad?

    • Correct

      Correct, there are those who believe the secular court judge is in charge, not the Almighty.

  • Chatzkel Stern

    Is the head shliach trying to set himself up as a shtikl rebbe? The centers are supposed to be indpendent and self-sustaining.

  • Humongous Chillul Hashem and Chillul Lubavitch!!

    How many more people do you want to be merachek from Torah and Chassidus?

  • Moishe

    That’s what Chabad is all about going to court if u lose a din Torah ,we are no better then anybody else it’s a busha and all in the rebbes name

  • Baruch Dayan Emes

    Baruch Dayan Emes. ..
    here we go again
    Jew vs. Jew
    all for the sake of making a name for oneself and for money..:(
    .Ad Mosai?! We want Moshiach Now!!!

  • A very sad day in Lubavitch

    Does anyone realize that if Shemtov wins rights to the building then every head shliach can steal the Chabad Houses built with sweat and tears of Shluchim in his state?

  • Amazing Display of Ignorance

    It is said that one should remain silent and be thought the fool than to speak and remove all doubt. Has any commenter here read all the beis din opinions or even the appeals court opinion, which is public record. Obviously not. If anyone had they would know that it was Rabbi Silberberg that has ignored at least four beis din opinions, all saying that he should return the shul to Lubavitch. This action is merely seeking enforcement of the beis din orders because beis dins have no effective rights of enforcement in our time. So, please, enough with the misguided emotional outbursts.Educate yourselves on the issue or in the alternative, if you are not privy to the facts, then please remain silent.

    • Response

      Another fact is that when the lawsuit was filed, the same Bais Din issued a letter stating that Shemtov can only file civil suit against Silberberg personally, not the Shul, Shemtov completely ignored this and sued the entire shul for the deed. Chabad of Michigan has not provided any support to this congregation in over 30 years and provided very little when it started. It has always been self sufficient, like every other chabad. Yet this is the only known case anywhere like this.

  • moshe

    will someone enlighten the readers was there a din torah?
    for those who claim it’s loshon hora, it’s important to inform for all to be careful that this doesn’t occur to anyone else and remain protected.
    whats really behind all this?

  • Not loshon horah

    Being that this was filed in court and is public information, it is not loshon hora. It is a public service to bring this to the attention of anash.

    • K

      The word you are looking for: to’eles. If there is a to’eles it isn’t loshon horah.

    • Milhouse

      No, that is not the word Eli is looking for. He didn’t say it’s not loshon hora because it’s useful. He said it’s not loshon hora because it’s a matter of public record. And he’s correct. Anything that’s a public record is by definition not loshon hora.

  • ploni almoni

    how did you decide that Rabbi Shemtov”won a small victory” I.m sure he considers it much more than your appraisal
    All the commentators most probably do not know that prior to this there was a lDin Torah @ Vaad Rabbonei Lubavitch which ruled against Rabbi Silberberg, and because RS did not listen to the BD ruling, Rabbi Shemtov went to court to enforce the ruling.

    • YMSP

      I’m not going to say that if today’s “Rabbonim” were like Reb Zalman Shimon Dvorkin A”H and Rov Yitzchok HaKohen Hendel A”H that this wouldn’t be happening, because you’ll answer that one has to work with today’s and you’d be right except for the following point.

      If today’s “rabbonim” would follow Shulchan Aruch, provide a proper meiheichan dantuni and be dan a din emes, more of them would be listened to. I’ve seen the new young ones and some older ones break every halachic consideration, steal without cause, write what should be considered a signed pashkvil and call it a psak and even tear apart families until they are put in cherem themselves by proper, non-political, batei din.

  • Someone who was there from the start...

    The fight between Shemtov and Silberberg has been on going since the 1970’s. Shemtov helped the shul originally known as Congregation Bais Chabad of West Bloomfield off the ground in it first 2-5 years. However once the shul was ready to buy the land and build a building, Shemtov was pretty much out of the picture, however; Shemtov’s supporters did help fund the building. In my personal opinion (and I am a business professional) the land and building belong to the Congregation – now know as Tugman Bais Chabad Torah Center. Neither Silberberg or Shemtov have any rights to the deed. It belongs to the congregation. And the members who pay dues to keep and maintain the building and the organization that pays Silberberg’s salary. He is just an employee. Silberberg has no authority to turn the deed over to Shemtov.

  • Important story

    Stories like these must be publicized. The public has a right to know what is going on especially when they find these places.

  • finally

    Now the court can find find that the head shliach is wrong in the first place!

  • Facts are facts

    The fact is that the Rebbe appointed him to be in charge of the state.
    One my not like what he does, but the fact is, that he has the right to say what goes on in his state.
    If it wasn’t like this then everyone could do whatever they want and chas vesholom what would then happen.

    • Facts

      “If it wasn’t like this then everyone could do whatever they want and chas vesholom what would then happen.”

      So I guess the better alternative is that every head Shliach can do whatever he wants? Why are you assuming the Head Shliach is more right in doing “whatever he wants” then the Shliach?

    • answer to reply

      The head shliach did not do what he wants he want to a bes din

  • #14 and #18

    it’s interesting that you conveniently forgot to mention the psak of vaad rabonei lubavitch which clearly says that shemtov can’t go to secular court or the fact that the psak could not be carried out by rabbi silberberg being that he’s just an employee of the shul

    • yanki

      Correct, and thats why he probablu did not go to fight this in court, and rather went to beis din. The reason for court is to legally enforce the ruling of the beis din.

  • Rebbe's directive

    Can anyone display any directive from the Rebbe that states that a Head Shliach’s corporation should legally own every Chabad House in his state?

    To my knowledge the majority of Chabad Houses aren’t owned by the corporation of the Head Shliach of the state. So why should this case be any different?

    Please enlighten?

  • To #24

    Those are the facts, when the Rebbe sent Harav Shemtov to the state of Michigan, he gave him the power to be in charge of the entire state.
    When a group of Shluchim complained to the Rebbe about Harav Shemtov, the Rebbe told them that if they didn’t like it they could leave, and that’s what they did.

    This is no secret, ask anyone who knows what’s going on.
    What world are we living in?
    Can each one do as he may? NO! just like in any other company, there is a boss and he sets the rules, he hires and he fires.

    • Milhouse

      Those are the facts, when the Rebbe sent Harav Shemtov to the state of Michigan, he gave him the power to be in charge of the entire state.

      Says who?

  • ACHDUS!!!

    I think Berel should write an Ahavas Yisroel ‘ACHDUS’ Sefer Torah just like his brother did !!!

  • Besi din - Court

    Just to set the record straight:

    I write this objectively with a deep insight into what has happened between the congregation and Rabbi Shemtov.

    The congregation was never called to a Din Torah. They were willing to attend a fair Din Torah, however, the Shemtovs were hesitant to call them to one (maybe they were frightened of the outcome). It is precisely because Vad Rabanei Lubavitch knew/knows and understand/understood that this is between the congregation and the Shemtovs, that they ruled in prohibition against taking this to court for arbitration.

    Rabbi Shemtov has deliberately gone against the Psak din in an unwarranted way. Whether he deserves to win or lose has nothing to do with his defilement of Beis din. This is not the first time nor the last someone did not listen to Beis Din, nonetheless, for a head Shliach it’s embarrassing.

    A lot of money has already been consumed by this political blunder. It’s my sincere hope that this Chilul Hashem will be over soon, and all further money be used to support worthy causes.

    Respectfully,
    Esq.

    • Not true

      After Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch wrote that “according to Halacha you don’t need permission to go to a court to get something that a bed din says is yours” it said that they specifically let take Silberberg to court.

      When the members (in the words of other rabbonim – those who received it from the theif) asked VRL why they allowed it, they said that since silberbergs name was on case they only deal with allowing for him.

      THEY NEVET WTOTE ANYWHERE THAT HE CANNOT NAME THE BOARD. No letter addressed to shemtov discusses this.

      On the other hand, there were detailed opinions by two botie din, specifically saying that it was allowed and encouraged.

      Also, the premise of silberbergs case is that he is only an employee and has no influence on his board to do anything. Whoever believes that I have a bridge for you

  • The truth

    The truth is that Rabbi Silberberg is and always will be so successful and beloved, and some people just can’t handle that.

  • An outsider looking in

    Rabbi Silberberg is an employee. “Chabad” is a corporate brand name. In the state of Michigan, that brand is legally controlled by Rabbi Shemtov. All states and countries where Chabad is present operate in a similar fashion.

    Legally speaking, no employee or outside entity has the right to use, profit from, or steal the brand name belonging to another entity without consent.

    As an outsider looking in, the Tugman Torah Center’s error is as plain as the big blue sign in front of their building (see photo above). The Torah Center and its employees refuse to abide by the dictates of Chabad but insist on benefiting from the brand recognition that comes from the unsanctioned use of its name: “Congregation Bais Chabad.”

    This smacks of chutzpah. Only chabad emissaries & entities abiding by the dictates of the head shliach have the right to advertise themselves a “Chabad.”

    Now then, having isolated one point of contention in this long running dispute, it seems to me that the remedy is rather obvious. If there’s been a disagreement in the Lubavitch family (sadly) that’s irreconcilable, then let the Torah Center keep its congregation, but cease from using “Bais Chabad.”

    What’s in a name? Everything. Peace my brothers.

    • Response

      I agree, but Shemtov has no desire to remove the name Chabad from the shul, I believe he wants to take it over for the purpose and dismantling it due to his discontent for R. Silberberg. Peace and a psak din to have the term
      “Chabad” removed would be too easy and was never sought by Shemtov. When the land was purchased in the 70s and an organization was formed, the founders were Survivors that desired to build an Orthodox shul on that plot, which would be the first in that area. Chabad of Michigan only assisted in the process from a religious standpoint. The founders had no intention of the shul being a sub-entity of Chabad of Michigan. They agreed to hire SIlberberg as their rav around that time. Well over 99.9% of all resources that have gone into Torah Center did not come from Chabad of Michigan nor did the donors intend theur funds to go to Chabad of Michigan.

      Peace my brothers as well……

  • To 25

    You are lying and you know it.

    This is the only case ever where every single Chabad authority agreed to proceed with this case in court. Aguch. Merkos. And vadd raboniei Lubavitch more then once.

    In adttion agudas harabonim the largest orthodox rabbinic court authorized and supported this court case.

    Silberberg has approached many people to get this rescinded and of course was unable to. He lost multiple arbitrations and din torahs.

    Now it’s time to have the court confirm the dass Torah.

    Just because you are jellous of shemtov doesn’t mean He is wrong.

  • To 25

    Interesting that after so many din toiras etc. after everything that Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch wrote about Silverberg, after agudas harabonim wrote about him. After all that, you hang on to a misinterpretation of a Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch letter.

    Shemtov asked for permission to enforce a din toirah in court. VRL said that since his name was on the papers for bes din that is who they will give permission for. They NEVER said that Shemtov cannot name the board in an attempt to get what he won at a din toirah.

    Agudas harabonim AND a bes din comprised of rabbis Schochet, feigelstock and bogomilsky gave specific permission to name the board in the suit.

    Additionally, what Silberberg did was turn a Chabad house into a membership owned and run Shul (every member has vote). He continuously went openly against Chabad institutions and clear rulings of VRL by hidding behind his members saying that they control. Just imagine how frustrated VRL was that they let take him to court.

    VRL calked him someone who cunningly committed grave offences. Agudas harabonim called him a theif.

    Finally, the feigekstok bed din and Agudas harabonim encouraged the case and said that it will be a kiddush Hashem! To show that the rulling iof a bes din cannot be ignored.

  • Chabad institutions

    Do Chabad shuls belong to the members, the shliach, the head shliach, or Chabad headquarters? It seems like the Chabad headquarters should have something written in the establishment of a Chabad institution, about who the place belongs to, what to do if a shliach leaves, what can be done if a shliach is ineffective or does not conform to central Chabad headquarters directives, what to do with Chabad houses that are not under the auspices of the Chabad headquarters, etc. If these and other criteria were stipulated before a Chabad house was established, it could avoid machlokes.

  • use your head

    Head shliach can take off he Chabad name from any Chabad house in his State at any time. Vaad Rabbonei Lub will rule always in favor of head shliach. (head shliach is NASI of the STATE)
    A Smart shliach, doesn’t put his Chabad House under the name of ” Chabad of ….” because you dunno what can happens in next generations and therefore ,does it as in this case, the shul belongs to a non profit org, and Rabbi receives a salary
    Smart head shliach should enfocre that every Chabad House be under ” Chabad of….” as the Rebbe did when he assume as official Rebbe, to have the moisdos under his name ( as you see in many States that head shluchim, that suppose to be head are irrelevant)

  • YMSP

    So heartwarming to see two good men fighting each other.

    Not sure why this is newsworthy but the next time someone invites someone to stay over for shabbos and accidentally serves them rotten eggs for breakfast, I hope it’s seen to be equally newsworthy.

    Mit di achdus fun Chasidim vet men firer ontkegen Meshiech’n. Not judging either of these two and sometimes people, if they have a heter arkaos, have to do what they have to do. But why publish this?

  • ploni almoni

    to #25
    Sorry butYou got it wrong,
    Rabbi Shemtov’s case in court is not only against Rabbi Silberberg but also the officers of the shul, VRL gave only permission to take Rabbi Silberberg to court but not the officers (Since they were not opart of the original DT). If you would read the 11 page appeals court document it states that he did have permission from a beis din (not VRL), to proceed with court (and all this was taken into consideration to overrule the lower court on the issue of statute of limitation,

    • Follow Up

      An to follow up, when Shemtov began the court case a couple years back, the BD followed up with a letter stating they could only go after Silberberg personally. This was completely ignored and Shemtov sued the entire shul anyways.

  • YMSP

    One point: I’ve heard of the Rebbe approving of taking off a shliach’s name. I haven’t heard of the Rebbe saying to take back a synagogue or that the rabbi can be removed. Maybe someone can enlighten on this.

    The Rebbe did say to close down Bitayon Chabad (for printing a mistake that would make today’s hefker petrishkeh rags red with busha), but there was almost definitely no land/building involved in that case.

  • Hmmm...

    It is a Shemtov thing to take their people to court, just as his brother-in-law Rabbi Sudak, of London, England did a few years ago. I don’t believe Rabbi Sudak’s case went to goyishe court, but he also ousted one of his close workers… Many people, and not just shluchim, don’t like when their workers underneath become more successful or popular than they are. Rabbi Shemtov didn’t like when Rabbi Kranz a”h, was more popular than he was and ousted him from Detroit many years ago. I’m sure this goes on in other places, but to go to court is completely shameful and will bring Moshiach NOW!!! :( :( :(

  • Unique case. Very justified

    Many rabbonim looked at this including rabbonim chosen by silberberg.

    Everyone knows that no matter who is on the board of a Chabad house, they have to listen to their head shliach and definitely Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch.

    The bes din found (written in the psak) that Silberberg changed his corporation from Chabad run to membership run.

    At least three times he openly violated direct orders from VRL and claimed that he is only an employee and has no control.

    Rabbonim felt that because this trust was broken and he “stole” the organization, it has to be returned.

    In fact the case is ONLY about enforcing a din toirah.

    The only question the judges will ask is : does this Shul have to listen to a psak of VRL?

    That is the only question.

    The Shul claims that they are not bound by rulings of VRL. In fact they once sent a lawyers letter threatening to sue VRL in court if VRL continues mixing into their buissenes.

    For them to say that this is what the Rebbe meant by being independent is grossly dishonest.

    Please look objectively.

    There is a reason why Rabbi Feigelstock, Agudas harabonim and others say that this case is a KIDDUSH HASHEM

    • Kiddush Hashem???

      This case is not Kiddush Hashem, its complete Chilul Hashem. Nothing personal to you, but to say that this case is Kiddush Hashem is ridiculous. Just look at all these posts and imaging the hatred brewing in the Detroit community. No one has yet to mention what R. Silberberg did that was so incredibly wrong to warrant Shemtov dismantling what R. Silberberg and his congregation have built up for nearly 40 years. It’s all about a personal spat between Shemtov and Silberberg. That simple. Shemtov want’s the shul, Silberbrg and his congregation simply want to be left alone.

    • Ilan a member there

      That is inaccurate.

      The corporation was never changed from chabad run to membership run.

      The building has always been part of the corporation.

      It was always owned and controlled by the board of directors.

  • i dont understand

    What did R Silberberg do wrong?

    Trom what I understand, he is an erliche yid who’s shul is full or torah and programs according to halacha. Why is R Shemtov starting up with him

  • 1,000,000 dollars in Legal Fees paid by Shemtov

    Could it be possible that R. Shemtov would take funds that people donated to spread Torah and Chassidus and use it on a frivolous case?

    Does Ontario have every Chabad house under R. Grossbaum’s name. NO!

    Does any self respecting Shliach/lay person agree with R. Shemtov? NO.

    Shame on the Shemtov Family for wasting people’s donations and time. SHAME!

    Will this give a bad name to R. Shemtov and his family? YES.

    Is Rabbi Silberberg successful, kind, giving and a mentsch? YES.

    Should Marty Goodman be happy about giving over his hard money that he gave to build the shul in memory of his mother to R. Shemtov? NO.

    Is every Chabad house in Illinois under the Moscowitzes? NO. That would have been a very sorry day….especially with the debt that they are laden with.

    R. Shemtov, this is very, very unmazeldik for you to be doing this. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Even the Shluchim in Michigan don’t agree with you, including myself.

    Why are you doing this? Because you want to make sure that Rabbi Slilberberg’s shul remains in YOUR hands? Shameful and despicable.

    Your own fortunes will be affected by this and your donors will start to give less. Stop doing this!

    With the most respect and Kavod HaRabonim.

    • Appeal Team

      For the Appeal to simply receive a day in court, Shemtov brought an attorney from the top litigation firm in Michigan, the top constitutional attorney from D.C. and a top Religious Institutions attorney from Colorado Springs. Yes, this has so far been a $1,000,000 en devour so far and will likely ultimately cost several times the net worth of the property he is looking to take over, and for what? For What For What I ask!!

      Think of all the amazing things that could have been done with these charitable community funds!

  • Chabad Attorney

    A decision in Michigan state court only affects the state of Michigan. So no matter the final legal ruling no Shliach in any other state can use the ruling as legal precedent.

    However, a legal ruling in favor of R. Shemtov would clearly enable other Head Shluchim to try the same maneuver.

    My opinion is every Shliach who – without the Head Shliach’s ongoing support – raised funds, built a building, pays the annual carrying costs, etc, should immediately change the legal corporate name of his Chabad house. The name “Chabad of _____” should be removed. It should be replaced with something more in line with “Jewish Center of ____ – Darchai Chabad” or “Congregation ______ – Nusach Chabad”.

    The reason for such a change is one cannot copyright a religious belief. For example, one cannot be prevented from opening a Reform or Conservative temple and using the word “Jewish” or “Torah” in its title – even if you feel that it is not Jewish. Similarly, one cannot be prevented from opening (l’havdil) a church and using the word “Protestant” in its title. So too here, if the entity is simply stating in its name a religious belief (we follow the Chabad path) as opposed to stating it is aligned with “Corporate Chabad” then the Head Shliach would not be in a position to force a takeover.

    • Question on your diea

      In your proposal, would vaad rabbonie lubavicth have the right to make determinations regardingthis shul?

      If not, that it is clearly against the Rebbe’s wishes.

    • Follow Up

      An Excellent Point. The only problem is that it doesn’t matter what the name is changed to. The underlying premise of Shemtov’s fight has absolutely nothing to do with what name is on the building.

    • TO #60

      While on the topic of the Rebbes wishes, he clearly stated that it is expected that individual Centers be independent. He clearly states that in an open letter. Keep in mind that with all the discussion taking place here, nobody has mentioned what Torah Center or R. Silberberg did that is so incredibly wrong that should force them to be the first Chabad Center in the history of the world (not just the US) to deed over everything they have independently built over the last 40 years.

    • Ilan a member there

      The main people who donated money to the shul were the shul members, and they did not donate it because there was a chabad rabbi.

      The bulding was bought, paid for, and maintained almost entirely by it’s members.

      Speaking solely for myself I wouldn’t have a problem taking chabad off the name.

      It seems that to Shemtov just having chabad as part of the name of the shul means he has the power to seize other people’s property and assets.

      In my opinion if that would be the case that is a price I’m not willing to pay.

  • to Chabad Attorney

    I desagree with Chabad attorney

    The shliach who raised the money ,built a building, pays the annual carring the costs, the fundraiser was possible because the “Chabad ” name and because this shliach represents the Rebbe
    If he changes the Corporate name is stealing from CHABAD, stealing from the Rebbe
    Every head shliach should enforce that Chabad Houses are under Chabad corporations
    I am sorry but shluchim shouldnt be owners of Chabad houses, when people donate money ,donates for the shul, for Chabad, not to give real estate to a particular shliach
    In fact many people (most congregants) don’t like if the shliach spends lots of money in his personal things

    • Milhouse

      Nor do people donate money to give real estate to the state’s “head shliach”. They donate to the local shul because they want to support the local shul, and they want their donation to remain with the local shul. That is exactly the case here; it’s the local shul — the ballebatim who gave the money in the first place — that Shemtov is suing.

  • Member

    In response to #14 and #20 etc.
    Rabbi Silberberg never went against the Psak Dinim of the Batei Dinim. The Zablo opinions were that Rabbi Silberberg has the responsibility to be Mishtadel bchol koichoi ( try as hard as possible) to get the board to transfer ownership to Rabbi Shemtov.
    He tried but the board would not accept any such suggestion, especially after they had changed their by laws, ensuring the continued existence of the Bais Chabad as a Bais Chabad, to comply with a previous request by Chabad mediators in this matter, and were told that these actions would stop the harassment. Rabbi Silberberg does not have any ownership of the building and therefore is not empowered in any way to transfer it to anyone. The Board,who do have the legal ownership, have said that they are ready to go to a Bais Din to settle the matter, ( they were never party to the Din Torah of Rabbi’s Shemtov and Silberberg) but Rabbi Shemtov did not want to go that route even though he was specifically told that he did not have permission to take the board to secular court with out first going with them to a Bais Din. They realized the terrible Chillul Lubavitch that this would cause. Under intense pressure the Bais Din said that if Rabbi Shemtov gets permission from a Bais Din (not specifically Chabad) to take the Board to court, then they will evaluate if he may do so. Rabbi Arye Ralbag of Triangle K, point man of Agudas Horabonim, gave them such a heter without any consultation with both parties involved, and then the totally independent and completely impartial Aguch, under Rabbi Avremel Shemtov, also gave permission to Rabbi Shemtov to take the board to a secular court.

    There was never any directive from Rabbi Shemtov to Rabbi Silberberg that the Bais Chaabd should be under the name of Bais Chabad of Michigan. On the contrary, he never wanted the Bais Chabad registered as such as then he would be assuming financial liability which he never wanted.

  • Wrong perspective

    I think that the frum community should learn our lesson by now that having bad apples is not a chilul Hashem. Every community has always had bad apples.

    A chilul Hashem, is when this unreasonable protection of image, causes us to allow lawlessness.

    We cannot be afraid to take just cases to court. If you cannot enforce a din torah, that is the biggest chilul Hashem.

    In this case, Lubavitch of Michigan is saying that it had the right to enforce a rulling by Rabbonie Lubavitch.

  • These days

    Head Shluchim are fourcing Shluchim to sign the title in the name if the heads org. It’s in the contract when he brings you to town. And this does make sence. I would just ask the head to sign that he will cover the costs but then again I’m not that submissive to become a sheliach.

  • shliach in michigan

    All shluchim in michigan are siding with rabbi silberberg in this case (besides rabbi shemtovs family and workers) simply because the rebbe clearly states in numorous letters that each chabad house should be rum independently and because if rabbi shemtov wins this courtcase he”ll be able to take away our chabad houses in a simaler fashion

  • letter from rabonim re case

    From Agudas Harabonim:

    Regarding the permission issued by our beth din [Rabbinic court] to Rabbi Sholom DovBer Shemtov (by virtue of his role as director of Chabad-Lubavitch of Michigan), which permits him “to resort to civil courts [in his case] against Rabbi Elimelech Yosef Hakohen Silberberg and the institution Bais Chabad Torah Center of West Bloomfield, and the members of [its] Board by virtue of their role at that institution, in order to confirm the Rabbinic ruling [in his favor],” ….

    Clearly, as long as the Rabbinic ruling is not followed in full, this permission remains in force, and it is permitted for Rabbi Sholom DovBer Shemtov to do anything in his power to seek fulfillment of the ruling issued by a Jewish beth din, and for which the two parties signed their agreement to accept. This permission is not limited to a specific person or to a specific claim, but to the actual ruling, and he may continue pursuing his claim in civil courts in order to confirm the ruling of a Jewish beth din, without [any need] to participate in any further din Torah [Rabbinic court hearing], and it is obvious that there is no place for concern in this case for [possible] desecration of the Divine Name, G-d forbid.

    From the ruling of vaad robbonie lubavitch:
    : “According to the facts, it seems clear that the synagogue was established by Chabad-Lubavitch of Michigan even before REYS was appointed, and over the years, funds were raised for the synagogue using the name of ‘Chabad-Lubavitch’… Therefore there is no justification for removing the synagogue from being an institution within the framework of Chabad-Lubavitch to become ‘independent,’ and it makes no difference what was REYS’s role in this [change], whether it was direct or indirect… It is clear that the actual transfer of ownership from being an institution of the Rebbe (may his merit protect us) to private individuals (and concealing this from Rabbi S. D. B. Shemtov), and severing it from Chabad-Lubavitch and making it independent, was an injustice of the highest degree.”
    Further on, they wrote several times about REYS’s deeds (this is as written by the two Rabbinic judges who had dealt with this case in the past): “Since, in actual fact, REYS transferred ownership of the institution to lay members…, from a [civil] legal perspective they [the lay members] are the institution’s owners (because REYS transferred it to them)… In their view, they [the lay members] are the institution’s legal owners and are not subject to the authority of Lubavitch (because REYS actually transferred it to them contrary to Torah law)… As far as REYS in concerned, this constituted ‘starting it deliberately’ (his transfer of the institution to the lay members) and ‘eventually [he continued] under duress’ (for it caused the lay members to behave as if they were ‘independent’)… For, also from the perspective of the lay members (who were the ones who received ownership of the institution from REYS)…”

    From letter of Silberberg to Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch
    “But let make it abundantly clear: I will not submit to your authority in this issue, since you have no jurisdiction in the matter.
    From Vaad Rabbonie Lubavitch
    “Rabbi E. Silberberg is obligated to arrange soon – but not later than three months from today – that the land and the building be returned to the [organizational] framework of Chabad-Lubavitch (as stated in the Rabbinic ruling)… If that is not arranged (within three months), then we will seriously examine Rabbi S. D. B. Shemtov’s demand to accomplish his aim by other ways and means.”
    Next letter:
    “Since, for some reason, Rabbi Shemtov is unable to attain what is rightfully his according to the outcome of the Rabbis’ ruling, this does, generally speaking, constitute sufficient cause to permit him to attain this through civil court,”.
    In a letter dated 23rd Nissan, 5770 [4/07/2010], the distinguished Rabbi Y. Y. Feigelstock (Rabbi and Halachic authority of the Chabad community of Argentina) permitted Rabbi S. D. B. Shemtov to retrieve whatever was in his power through civil court. This was based on his discussion with the two arbitrating judges from the two sides, as he writes: “After speaking with the two Rabbis selected by the two sides, the distinguished Rabbi Dovid Shochet (long may he live) and the distinguished Rabbi Moshe Bogomilsky (long may he live)…After examining the situation whereby the Bais Chabad is, from a [civil] legal perspective, under the control of lay persons, the two above-mentioned Rabbis had agreed that, since so much time had passed, yet nothing had been accomplished to fulfill their ruling, it is permitted for Rabbi Sholom DovBer [Shemtov] to try to retrieve whatever he can through civil court… Therefore, in my opinion, he is obligated to make an effort to retrieve whatever he can in any legal manner, i.e. by means of the civil courts and the like.”
    Again, in an e-mail dated 7th Iyar, 5772 [4/29/2012], the distinguished Rabbi Y. Y. Feigelstock wrote: “At the time that I wrote [the ruling] giving this permission, both the above-mentioned Rabbinic judges were aware of the Board of lay persons, and in their ruling, too, it is mentioned, and they were aware that the actual lawsuit in civil court would be against those who had acquired [the institution] from the fraudster [REYS], those in whose possession the stolen ‘article’ now is, and it was under these circumstances that the permission was granted. Clearly there is no need for any further beth din hearing, for all agree, and it was so ruled at the din-Torah, that R. Elimelech Yosef [Silberberg] stole the property illegally and transferred it to the Board of lay persons. Accordingly, what reason could there be to conduct any further hearing with anyone who received it from the fraudster? Therefore it is clear that R. Sholom DovBer [Shemtov] can sue the Board in civil court in order to correct the injustice perpetrated against him, and there is no other way he can get the injustice corrected. We are obligated to allow the innocent party to win his case in order to retrieve what belongs to him.”

    • Incorrect Info

      Any Bais Din that receives misguided facts is going to rule on misguided facts. Silberberg never owned the shul and never transferred it to the board. Additionally, whoever took the time to publish these did not include a letter from perhaps the most influential Bais Din, the Agudas Chassidai Chabad, which states and reiterates that Shemtov only has permission to sue Silbergerg only. The circuit judge used this fact, among others, when deciding to throw the case out originally. Additionally, The recent rulings above on false information are from a Rav in Argentina!!! Come On!! Anyone can search the planet to find a Bais Din that will only hear one side and specifically rule in their favor.

    • To the responder.

      A classic example of intellectual dishonesty.

      One Rabbi out of a dozen that weighed in on this is from Argentina and that’s the only one you can think about.

      The rabbi from Argentina, who is internationally respected, states that he spoke with both rabbis more intimately involved in this case. None of those rabbis has ever denied it.

      Then you go from intellectual dishonesty to plane heresy. I’m glad that you started using that argument so people here can see where you come from. You state that the rabbis were misinformed. Your Rabbi had every chance to appeal this decision to the other rabbis and to everyone else who looked at this.

    • Please stop quoting falsehood. This letter is overly edited.

      Respectfully,
      Esq.

    • Incorrect Info - to #73

      A few things:

      1. Naftali Silberberg (NS) has an excellent description/summary below.
      2. Rabbi Silberberg is not “My Rabbi”. So please don’t practice hypocrisy and make unfounded assumptions. I’m just an outsider who looks at all facts and heavily disagrees with what the Shemtov Family of Michigan is doing.
      3. I stand by my comments since NS states that the BD that gave Shemtov permission to sue everyone never bothered to speak with both sides. I’ve been a practicing yid my whole life and never heard of such a thing.
      4. What do you have to gain or loose if Shemtov wins or Silberberg wins? Are you and at least 9 other families going to move near the Torah Center to populate the empty building, built, funded and maintained with next to no Shemtov support since its inception, if the congregation simply moves a few blocks away?

  • to 49

    ooops

    you forgot to mention that silbereg signed over the property after the Psak. small mistake on your part…NOT.

    oh, and by the way, dont you think there should be a Himmel Gishrei, that a huge chabad house is contorled by pepole who lav davka put on Rabeinu Tam?

    are you kiding me, read your own words.

    • Facts?

      But Rabbi Silberberg never had ownership of the building. It was purchased by several donors, built by several donors, maintained by membership for 30+ years and everyone involved unanimously agrees that their efforts were not so Shemtov would control their destiny someday.. Where is the compassion for the 100+ member families, comprising of 100% of the congregation that unanimously don’t want their property to go over to Shemtov? Again I ask, where is the compassion?

  • 61 comments are enough

    Anyone reading all these comments will get the full picture.

  • Larry

    That’s exactly why the court is letting it go ahead there’s nothing more enjoyable to see two rabbis fight it out and it goes all over the media

  • one main question remains

    VRL wrote clearly numbers of times that there is no permission to take BB to court and he needs to go with them to din Torah. They asked to go to DT, he refuses and taking very close BB of Chabad to court and destroying everything. Against a clear direction of VRL. This is a himel geshrei

    • josh in the know

      you are wrong.

      VRL NEVER told shemtov that he cant take the board, let me repeat that “NEVER” was rabbi shemtov told that he cant take the board to court.

      although there are numerous comments, and as admitted by silberberg himself, that he was told numerous times by VRL to do things and he refused to listen.

      there is not one letter out there from VRL telling shemtov anything, and he did not listen.

      you continuously bringing up the silly comment about the BB, is non sense, while it is true that VRL did write to the board saying that the permission granted was for silbereberg, they also advised the board that when going to court to to get back what Rabonim said belongs to you, you do not need any other permission.

      rabbi Fegelstock was very clear and specific when he said that the permission he granted for going to court was approved by the 2 survivivning members of the beis din

  • VRL--beth din

    can we see 1 letter written on the staitionary of VRL and signed that gives permission to SHEMTOV to go to court. what is known,that 1 year ago there was another similar case of a head shliach that was unhappy about a psak of the BAIS DIN VRL and he went to secular court to sue 1 of the rabbonim on the BAIS DIN and also went to the AGUDAS HARABONIM and got a threatening SIRUV against the Lubavitcher ROV to repeal his psak.[all this for a nice sum of money] .also,in the case of shemtov in detroit it is known that he sent his sons to harras and terrorize one of the rabonnim of the VRL bais din till he resigned . AGAIN ,PLEASE SHOW THE PSAK AND HETER ON THE VRL STATIONARY ,SIGNED.

  • Former Oak Parker

    What a shame to be reading this! Rabbi Silberberg has done a tremendous job with his Shul and his baalei batim – he is very respected and well loved by his members and other Anash. There’s nothing to say about R. Shemtov and his followers. One fact that is correct in the above comments is that – yes, MANY Anash families moved away from Oak Park/Detroit en masse when they just couldn’t take it anymore from the boss. I hope this matter is resolved in Rabbi Silberberg’s favor IY”H and that he and his family can live without this tzores. Moshiach NOW!

    • Amen!

      Rabbi Silberberg is the greatest blessing to Detroit.

      Rabbi Shemtov has given us a pack of bitter herbs.

  • To summarise

    About 10 Rabbonim told Silberberg that he was wrong. Some calling him a thief.

    Three bottie din gave specific permission to sue Rabbi Silberberg in court.

    Two bottie din specifically included the board. One said that they did not include the board in their permission though they did not say that you can’t.

    The Silberberg side has a few very shallow complaints. [ it is very interesting that it is called the Silberberg side since even according to them EVERY ROV THAT HAS LOOKED AT THIS GAVE PERMISSION TO SUE HIM. NOT A GREAT REPUTATION FOR A SO CALLED GOOD GUY]

    1. “VRL said that you cannot sue the board”

    That is a lie. They only said that they only give permission to those specified in the din torah.

    2. The rabbonim in the bes din got it wrong.

    This was heard by more than one bes din and was appealed a number of times. The decision was always the same.

    3. Feigelstock is from argentina and ralbag is from…

    This argument conveniently forgets all other rabbonim and is chutzpadik to respected rabbonim.

    4. The rabbonim only told him to try

    That is not true. In 2008 they told him “get it done in three months”

    5. This is a terrible precedent that all head shluchim will take away properties.

    Not true. This is only a precedent that if you go to a din torah and lose, it gets enforced.

    6. Its a chilul hashem

    Many rabbonim said that it is a kiddush hashem to enforce a din torah.

    7. All shluchim have their independence

    Please pick up the phone and find out how many shluchim gave power over their shul to the members (any jew who pays dues). Please dont tell me that the by laws has protection. that is worthless.

    8. It is not being nice to the members.

    These are members who are so ungrateful to Rabbi Silberberg that after 40 years of dedication, he comes to them and says “i made a big mistake. All rabbonim are telling me that I did something very wrong. can you please help me fix it. And every last member said NO

    .

    • Great summary

      Wow. Now maybe you can join the 3 families that are allowed to marry Shemtovs.

    • Buddy.

      Your are an ignoramus. You believe, (and quite frankly I think your on someones payroll), that if you lie enough people will believe you.

      Please stop convincing yourself and open your eyes.

  • No Risk NO REWARD

    When a Shliach is caught doing something wrong (infrequently) the higher ups are LOUD and unequivocal that this person was not under the control of ‘Central Chabad’ that each Chabad Center is a separate entity etc … etc … that there is no central office responsible for this person’s misdeeds or financial obligations etc … So how then when the higher ups want to take money, buildings, lands can they speak out of the other side of their mouths and say there is only a ‘Head Shliach’ and everyone under him serves at his pleasure, and his ’employees’ property and congregation all really belong to the Head Shliach … this is such a farce. I hope the court sees through this baloney and sends Chabad of Michigan flying. And I write this as someone once shown deep personal kindness by Rabbi Berl Shemtov, and I don’t know R’ Silberberg from a bump on a log, but in this matter, R’ Shemtov is SO wrong. As was the Shliach in California who did something similar (WORSE) to one of his great shluchim. If Central Chabad is not liable for an individual Shliach’s misdeeds/debts, they CAN NOT claim ownership of an individual Shliach’s success and assets, especially because of some personal grudge, or if they want to ‘give’ that area to a family member.

  • the facts

    fact one: http://www.michbar.org/opinions/appeals/2014/052214/57166.pdf

    fact two: the funds that were supposed to be used to fix the community Mikvah in BCTC have been used to pay for the hefty expenses of the never-ending trial.

    Now you tell me- when your time comes and you meet the Maker and He asks why were you supportive of a head Shliach who did not see the value of Taharas Hamishpucha (please note there is NO mikvah located at “the Shul” run by Shemtov Jr.) and you respond “the Rebbe sent him”… trust me your children will need to say Kaddish for you much longer then 11 months… FACT!

  • brunya goldberg

    Alive and Well?????? WHat kind of terminology is that to use to describe a hateful lawsuit against a congregation that wants nothing more than to continue praying and using the building it rightfully owns.

  • Curious bystander. Question?

    I just read all these comments and I am a little surprised.

    The Chabad michigan defenders say that three bais dins including rabbonay Lubavitch said that they can take rabbi Silverberg to court.

    That seems very embarrassing to a rabbi. Did this ever happen before?

  • To #41

    The Vad said that he cannot take the shul to court, only Silberberg.

    To come and try to translate semantics, only a Shemtov can do,

    Respectfully,
    Esq.

  • Clarification on Beis Din Process

    One critical element that people are glossing over is the fact that the original din torah between Shemtov and Silberberg was a Zabloh.

    This means that any psak coming out of the din torah is only binding on the parties who agreed to the zabloh (pshoro). Thus, this ruling has no impact to the board of the beis chabad, or to any other shliach.

    This is simple and was reaffirmed by VRL twice.

    Another point being missed here is that all subsequent ‘rulings’ (feigelstock, ralbag, shuchat) were issued without both parties being present. This is against the basic principle of ‘Shomoa Bein Achechem’ which serves as the cornerstone of the judicial system. It calls into serious question the integrity of the aforementioned rabbonim & the plaintiff.

  • Simple yid

    I don’t know either rabbi personally but it sounds very strange to call a shul “Bais Chabad” if a non-Lubavitch board controls it and the shliach is really only an employee. What you have then is an Orthodox shul who hired a rabbi who happened to be a Lubavitcher, not a Chabad shul. If the shul was originally in Silberberg’s control it seems that when he for whatever reason ceased to have control and control was transferred to the board, he had a duty to report that to the shluchim office and then the shul should have paid back the money that Chabad of Michigan originally gave them. Otherwise we’re saying that a shliach can build up a shul as Chabad and then “sell” it to non-Lubavitchers without consulting anyone and still call it Chabad.

    • Fact

      Rabbi Silberberg never owned the shul. He never transferred ownership to the board. He was brought down to West Bloomfield as an employee and the original incorporation papers (with Rabbi Shemtov’s consent AND ENCOURAGEMENT) list the shul as belonging to the board. Those documents have never been changed since the shul was founded.

    • Someone who was there from the start...

      The shul started because a group of people in West Bloomfield wanted an orthodox minyan. They had help from Shemtov to bring these 10 together and had a temporary Rabbi which Shemtov provided (for lack of better word). After a year the minyan requested Shemtov to find a full time rabbi for them. A letter was set to the Rebbe and Silberberg came to interview and was hired by the minyan, which was previously incoroporated by the members as Bais Chabad of West Bloomfield.
      Silberberg did not start the minyan or the corporation that hired him.

  • Only one side claims rabbonim are wrong

    Only one side needs to try to convince readers that the rabbonim got it wrong.

  • Where do I go now?

    Okay, I’ve been in this congregation since 1977. I was challenged by an uncle that Chabad is a cult. I refuted that because the money I give stays where I put it, with my independently incorporated congregation. I’ll leave if Shemtov steals my shul. There are 2 other orthodox congregations in walking distance.

    And even with the corrupt bait din system (try getting a group of men NOT related to this family) Shemra lost in bias din. That is why he has gone to secular court. He has nothing to loose.

    BTW, if this had happened when I first met Chabad I would probably have left, and remained secular. I am amazed that our new members are staying.

    I also have nothing to loose. No member of the Shemtov family will even say hello to me. I don’t rank enough.

  • solution

    to make shalom, all the parties have to give sosmething in , just for the sake of ahavas Ysroel
    It doesn’t matter who is right or who is wrong
    If there is fight among jews, everyone loses spiritually
    There are many jews davening in the shul and Rabbi Silverberg is the Rabbi for many years
    Logic indicates that Rabbi Silberberg should continue being the rabbi and the congregants keep going to shul
    Property is a non profit organization, it should not be sold and continue as a shul
    First and foremost ,Take out the name “Chabad” from the building
    2nd, negotiate some money to pay back to Rabbi Shemtov , actual value proportional with the amonunt that Chabad Lubavitch contribuited to it
    Take a mortgage in the building, pay to Chabad of Michigan a chelek, and the congregation keep the shul as mentch
    I know, Rabbi Shemtov doesn’t like that, Rabbi Silverberg also, the members also don’t like this, but the point is that we have to give naches to the Rebbe, and bring this chillul Hashem to an end

    • Great Point

      But the only problem is that Torah Center wants peace and its current existence and Shemtov wants nothing less then its destruction and dismantlement. Nothing Less!

  • Anonymous

    The very last letter from VRL was a statement that Rabbi Shemtov does not have permission from VRL to take the BB to court.

    The Shemtov camp will tell you that this letter is inconsequential because it wasn’t actually addressed to Rabbi Shemtov.

    This doesn’t change much in terms of whether taking the BB to court is permitted from the perspective of VRL.

    As far as VRL is concerned, Rabbi Shemtov is not permitted to take the BB to court because they were never summoned to a Beis Din.

    The Shemtov camp will answer (as you can observe in the posts above) that “never was there any letter to Rabbi Shemtov” forbidding him from taking the BB to court, because indeed, VRL never addressed their letter to him. But they did make this statement clear.

  • shemtov is just helping silberberg

    According to sliberberg he personally would follow the psak of VRL to the T. but nebach his board won’t listen to him and he does not have the power to implement the psak. all berl shemtov is doing in court is helping fulfill the psak of VRL

  • Very funny

    Funny to see how many people commenting here have a deep insight into the case from the Shemtovs perspective.

    Can we hear the Silberberg side? Or do the Silberbergs not care what others think, as they are only concerned with the truth.

    It’s my inclination to believe that the Shemtov side is being forced to comment here, and maybe create some falsehood. While the shul peacefully believes they can win without propaganda.

    Chosid

    • Shills

      Not only are these posters commenting from Shemtov’s perspective, they also adopt ‘names’ like Simple Yid and Curious Bystander to pretend they are impartial. But they are so transparent only the simplest of readers can’t see through them. The Olam senses that Silberberg is right. The courts hopefully will rule that way too. Shemtov has ZERO rights to that congregation’s shul. There is a strict divide between a head shliach giving SPIRITUAL guidance to shluchim ‘under’ him, and personally/corporately ‘owning’ the congregations that are built and developed in the various Jewish communities, especially when the ‘head shliach’ did not provide the funding or hold himself responsible for the debts incurred while building this community. Shemtov has NO legal, Halachik or moral standing. None.

    • Simple yid

      Rabbi Silberberg’s comment clarified for me the details of this particular case. Maybe I shouldn’t have made my comment above before knowing more of the facts, but you shouldn’t accuse people of conspiracy. As I said, I don’t know either party and certainly wasn’t “forced to comment”.

  • Let's ask Alen Zekelman

    Let’s ask Alen Zekelman who supports both Shemtov and Silberberg who he thinks the culprit is.

  • Who thinks

    I think this should go back to Beis din with berel and the shuls board. Or would berel not want that?

  • Naftali Silberberg

    The author of this comment has been verified by CHI.

    Although it is very painful to air our dirty laundry in public, and though writing this post is the last thing in the world I want to do, I feel compelled to set some facts straight, and at the same time, to make people aware of the possible disastrous impact upon shlichus, in general, that this case can have.

    Before I get to the main relevant facts, one interesting point: In their original psak din (dated 11 Iyar 5665) the beis din ruled that a commission should be formed whose task it would be to oversee the implementation of the psak din. The commission was comprised of R. S. Lazaroff and R. A. Lieberman, who represented Shemtov and Silberberg respectively, and R. E. Piekarski, appointed by the beis din. On 13 Tishrei 5767, R. Piekarski (the impartial third member of the commission) wrote to the beis din and explained why, in his estimation, the commission failed: “When we approached our task, it became apparent to us that R. Silberberg was willing to make compromises and is truly interested in making peace and cooperating with the commission and listening to its directives. On the other hand, it appears to us that R. Shemtov is avoiding making peace, and his only interest is getting rid of R. Silberberg and taking control of his shul. He is not seriously interested in making peace and that R. Silberberg should remain in Detroit.”

    I am more than willing to share this letter with anyone who wishes to see it. Or, feel free to call R. Piekarski to confirm this.

    Now to some facts. Everything I will say below is factual and documented. I will be glad to share the documentation and/or talk with anyone who is interested in knowing more information. My contact info can be found in the Tzach list.

    1. The Bais Chabad Torah Center of West Bloomfield (BCTC) has been incorporated as an independent legal entity (affiliated with Chabad of Michigan) since October of 1976 (several months after my father, R. Silberberg, arrived in Michigan)—a status that has not changed to this very day. The mosad was never “transferred,” as some have falsely written. Anyone following the case knows this to be true. In all the court briefs, never was it suggested that something of that sort happened—because it is a claim that can be disproved in approximately three seconds, by simply reviewing the BCTC’s legal papers, articles of incorporation, constitution, and bi-laws. If anyone claims that the mosad was transferred, please ask them to bring an iota of evidence that the BCTC was ever anything but an independent entity.

    2. While BCTC is “legally” independent, its status as a Chabad mosad is assured. Its bylaws assure, for example, that its rov will always be a Lubavitcher (and must be approved by the VRL), that its nusach is nusach ha’ari, etc.

    3. At a certain point in time, R. Shemtov decided that he doesn’t like the fact that BCTC is legally an independent entity. In 5765 a zabl”a beis din of Vaad Rabbonei Lubavitch ruled that R. Silberberg should try to change the status quo and have the board of the BCTC (its legal owners) to transfer the ownership to Chabad of Michigan. When this effort failed, VRL gave R. Shemtov permission to take R. Silberberg to court in order to achieve his goals.

    4. At no time did the beis din of VRL write or imply that R. Silberberg is not in compliance with the pesak din that they issued (lo tzaysa ledina c”v or the like). To the contrary, in a letter dated 9 Teves 5769, they bemoan the fact that the pesak din has not been implemented, but they are careful to write that R. Silberberg’s is not necessarily at fault for this.

    5. In a letter dated 9 Elul 5768, VRL wrote to the president of BCTC: “Obviously, if the Beis Din decides to grant Rabbi Shemtov permission to commence a civil suit, such permission will be limited to his claims against Rabbi Silberberg.”

    6. In the very last correspondence on the entire sorry matter from VRL, dated 16 Iyar 5772, they said that though R. Shemtov can take R. Silberberg to court:
    “…with regard to the question of whether R. Shemtov can take the board of BCTC to the secular courts, we reiterate that which we wrote to the board on 9 Elul 5768: ‘It is true that the din torah did not include your corporation. . . . It is self-understood that if the beis din decides to permit R. Shemtov to go to court, the heter will be limited to his complaints against R. Silberberg.’
    “From that point of time, there has been no din torah before us between R. Shemtov and the board. Therefore, our heter to go to court is limited to R. Silberberg only.
    “Like every Jew who has a dispute with another Jew and believes that the other has caused him damage, the two sides—R. Shmetov and the board—can summon one another to a din torah to any beis din they wish.”

    7. Upon seeing that VRL would not give him a heter to go to court, R. Shemtov received heterim to do so from R. Feigelshtok and from Agudas Harrabonim. Neither of them spoke to Rabbi Silberberg or the board of BCTC before issuing their heterim. Bottom line, the one beis din that was authorized to arbitrate between the parties made it very clear that R. Shemtov has no right to take BCTC to court.

    8. The board of BCTC is more than ready to go to a din torah with R. Shemtov. They are absolutely stunned that they are being pulled before a secular court by a frum Yid—when they have never been summoned to a din torah.

    9. Question: What will happen if, chas veshalom, R. Shemtov prevails in court? Answer: R. Shemtov will take ownership of a beautiful but very empty building. In the words of Avraham: “ten li hanefesh.” The scores of baalei teshuvah and the hundreds of shiurim and peulos will pick up and move to a building down the street. R. Shemtov can take possession of a building, not a community.
    Why then is R. Shemtov pursuing this? Why is he spending millions of dollars in the hopes of getting a building that is worth far less? Because he is trying to establish a legal precedent which will allow him to take possession of every independently held Chabad mosad in Michigan. The court papers are very clear in this regard. R. Shemtov’s primary argument is NOT based on the psak din of the beis din, because if that was his case, he would lose very quickly. After all, that same beis din refused to give him a heter to go to court and instructed that the matter should be settled in a din torah. Instead, he is saying that Chabad is a hierarchy, and as such, the hierarchy can simply “decree” that any subsidiary re-title its property! Here is a sample paragraph from Shemtov’s argument to the court—please read this closely!
    “Separate and apart from the consideration that Chabad-Lubavitch of Michigan is entitled to a transfer of the title of the property held by the West Bloomfield Bais Chabad to it because the Chabad Lubavitch Hierarchy has decreed that the transfer should take place, Chabad-Lubavitch of Michigan is entitled to a transfer of the property for the independent reason that the transfer of the property was endorsed in 2005 and directed in 2008 by the rabbinical authorities to whose decisions Rabbi Silberberg and the West Bloomfield Bais Chabad agreed to be bound in 2004.”

    In simple words, if R. Shemtov prevails, there will be legal precedent for any head shliach to swoop in—and even without a din torah—take away any subsidiary shliach’s mosad!

    10. All the above is obviously but a drop in the bucket. There is much more to say, but this forum is not conducive for such length. As said, I will be happy to talk with anyone about this case and/or provide documentation for anything I wrote above. I will not, however, respond on this forum to questions asked and the inevitable attacks that will come—because ein ladavar sof.

    With a broken heart and with hope for a miracle that will bring about a peaceful resolution,

    Naftali

    P.S. A general observation. When two parties are involved in a quarrel, it is very important to have a larger picture, one that includes a better understanding of the individuals involved. For that purpose, I suggest the following to anyone reading this comment: Open your Tzachlist to the Anash of Michigan page; there are 188 listings. Call any one of them at random and ask three questions: “Is your name R. Berel Shemtov? Are you closely related to R. Shemtov? “Can R. Shemtov deprive you of your job or livelihood?” If the answer to all three of these questions is no, then ask the person to tell you a little about R. Shemtov and a little about R. Silberberg. Try it; I guarantee you an enlightening experience.

    • Thanks you

      Thank you so much for clarifying. I now see why you’re so respected.

      May you father have a speedy victory.

      Amen

    • thank you!

      Finally a response from the Silberberg side. And what a response this is!

      answers all my questions i had from the angry slightly incoherent comments obviously against R Silberberg

      Hatzlacha!

    • Werner

      How much is a building in Michigan worth already? Definitely not as much as is being spent on lawyers.

      Just cut Beryl a check for 200G and be done with this tzoro!!

    • Thank you!

      Thank you for clarifying the whole story and answering any questions I had. I only wish this would have been posted earlier for the benefit of all the prior readers of this article.

    • Yasher Koach!

      A whole new picture has now emerged… Not that this was a surprise – knowing the two Rabbis involved here…

    • Simple yid

      Thank you for clearing up the facts that I had misunderstood. Iy”H R. Shemtov and the board will go to beis din and there will be a peaceful resolution.

    • yasher kochacha

      Your wonderful clarity of thought, and clarity of presentation should be utilized to serve klal yisroel.

      It was a pleasure to read this.

    • Clear and Concise

      Thanks for this post. I appreciate you putting in the time to clarify and state the facts in this case. Your honesty is refreshing.

    • Shills

      Bravo, Naftali. May you prevail in this matter and go from strength to strength.

    • Editor

      If you want to dispute any part of R. Silberberg’s letter you must do so with your real name and verify it with us via email in advance, otherwise your comment will not be posted.

    • great

      thank you!
      now things are more clear
      I thought that R Shemtov had the right to take the building out, but now I can say , that ” I was wrong”
      There is a lesson here to learn for youngeleit ” don’t waste your time looking for official shlichus in America”
      Make your own Tora Center and bring ydden to Iddishkait that
      this is the real success,
      Not to collect money for buildings

  • Shemtovs

    I feel like a response from you would be appropriate. Though, I don’t think people have much trust in you right now.

  • Ilan a member there

    I want to add in my $0.02 as a member that goes to that shul.

    1) The shul was started decades ago by a group of orthodox jews. They requested a rabbi from chabad to lead the services. That’s it. That doesn’t mean they gave away the right to control their own synagogue.

    2) This group of orthodox jews formed a corporation and bought a building.

    3) The Rabbi was an employee of the corporation.

    4) Shemtov took Rabbi Silberberg to a chabad beit din. The beit din ruled that Rabbi Silberberg had to try and convince the board to turn over the deed.

    5) There was such a meeting, in fact Shemtov was invited too, who didn’t show up. Rabbi Silberberg complied fully with the beit din ruling. The board said no. That should have been the end of it.

    6) They weren’t going to turn over the deed to their property, that they paid for and maintained.

    7) The board was never part of the beit din. Therefore, they were not subject to any ruling.

    8) Before taking a jew to court you are supposed to take them to the beit din first. However, the board of the Torah Center and/or the corporation were never part of the beit din ruling. The Torah Center offered to be a party of a beit din. Shemtov declined.

    9) If G-D forbid Shemtov won, he will just gain an empty bulding. No one will stay. The cost to the lawyers will be many times the value of the old building.

    10) What this is really about is a personal vendetta, Shemtov has for Rabbi Silberberg.

    The hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted to pay lawyers could be used to be helping jews in need.

    This is all utterly disgusting on Shemtov’s part.

  • A Shliach without Investments

    R BS has nine children and 85 grand children, They all need a future both with a Shlichus and finances. It is estimated that his estate is worth in excess of $15 million dollars all financed by contributions and investments. I understand that Rabbi Werner and Rabbi Greenberg both Shluchim in Michigan were asked to relinquish their Chabad Houses and turn them over to the greater cause – Lubavitch Shemtov Foundation of Michigan. If he wins and he may win, all Shluchim in Michigan that are not members of the Shemtov family will be asked to leave their post and join the 93 Shluchim who left Michigan over the years. Those Shluchim include, Rabbi Y Kranz a”h, Rabbi Simon Lazaroff. and Rabbi Josh Gordon, Lubavitch in Michigan will then turn into a family owned business. BS is of the opinion that this is the Rebbe’s Rotzon.

  • PostScript

    After reading all this, I fine a few things to be clear. No mention of what Silberberg did that was so incredibly wrong that his 100+ family member congregation should be destroyed (100% have promised not to step into the building if Shmetov owns it), and all division and chilul hashem is based off of Shemtov’s actions. What does Shemtov want, a vacant building? No court case = no division. Period. Bais Dins and personal vendettas should be overpowered by this simple fact.

  • Chaim Cohen

    Although this case may be different for various reasons, I ask you the following when one goes out on shlichus who does his Mossad belong to if not the lubavitcher rebbe? Now if you say once he gets fired he has to take the name down but the building which he gave his sweat and tears too still belongs to him. Than the building really never belonged to the lubavitcher rebbe. You can’t say while your a Shliach the building is the rebbes but once I’m fired it’s mine. As the saying goes you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Decide who your on shlichus for and why your on shlichus

    • Ilan a member there

      In this case the deed has belonged to the members, the corporation that bought and maintained the building

      The Rabbi is an employee of the corporation.

      It was never Rabbi Silberbergs and certainly not Shemtovs.

  • Mishneh 1:6

    The Mishneh 1:6 states “Make for yourself a Rav.” This is a fundamental reason why 100+ families have chosen the Torah Center as their spiritual home. The Shemtovs have stated that when they take over the building and oust R. Silberberg (G-d forbid), members will be allowed to continue to daven there. However, the Mishneh does not say “A Rav will be made for You”. As others have said, Shemtovs will have nothing but a nice empty building. Shame.

  • Ilan a member there

    I think this is a very important point.

    The Rebbe himself said that the chabad shuls should be financially independent.

    So if Shemtov keeps bringing up the hierarchy issue, he should keep to the wishes of the Rebbe.

    Please read the excerpt from the Rebbe’s letter carefully.

    http://www.thejewishnews.com/2012/06/21/motions-fly-in-chabad-lawsuit/

    In support of their motion, the Torah Center defendants included a 1984 letter written by the late Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson that stated in part, “it is well known that the various Chabad institutions are financially completely independent of our central office. This is also an obvious necessity, in view of the fact that there are hundreds of such institutions the world over, and it would be impossible to direct them all from headquarters.”

  • Nice!

    Very nicely put. Just to confirm, you are refering to Mishna “Pirkei Avos” 1:6.

  • Naftali Silberberg is the best

    I have known Naftali for a long time, and he is very bright and articulate. Thank you for enlightining the general public as to the true facts. I the shul a big didan natzach. I cant imagine that the rebbe would want a situation where a head shliach should just swoop in and take a shliachs possessions. This has happened before and I hope a judge rules that each chabad house is independant as the rebbe wanted.

    Go Naftali you are the best. I truly love you

    • Ilan, a member there

      It’s also not Rabbi Silberberg’s possessions.

      It’s the possessions of the members via the corporation, whom actually paid for the building, the upkeep, and the renovations.

      The building is and was never owned by Chabad.

  • Akiva[Kenny Borin}

    I have been a member of Bais Chabad of west bloomfield for twenty five years.From day one I felt that I have finally found my home.I have developed a personal friendship with Rabbi Silberberg and Chaya Sara and there children and grand-children.I am affectionatly known as uncle Akiva.They are truly my family.,and I also truly believe everyone in our Shul would say they are a part of the Silberberg family.
    I am not well versed in legal matters.I speak now to the hearts of those who are being touched by this travisty.Rabbi S. has been sent to us by the Rebbe to teach us the truths in life.To lead us on a path of human kindness.Rabbi S. and Chaya Sara have touched each and every person in our Shul,and miriads of others throughout detroit and the world.
    No matter what happens in the courts ,we will always stand behind our Rabbi.As he has given his life to us ,we give ours to him.
    Thankyou Rabbi Silberberg and Chaya Sara

  • It seems obvious

    that BS wants financial control and to set a precedent that would benefit other members of his family. If the goal were truly to bring Yidden together and not monetary benefit, this case would never have been instituted. The only good to come of this is that the community of Michigan is now aware of the true goals of BS. Let us hope STBC of WB prevails and this worry removed from the shoulders of Rabbi Silberberg who has always had only the best interests of this community at heart.