SYNOPSIS OF BOGUS L-I-E-TIGATION
FOR WHICH THE VICTIM IS
SOUGHT TO BE PUNISHED
Fabrication, deception, fraud, denial, cover-up, are words that are not normally associated with America's best and prestigious law firms. One would think that these negative descriptions are best reserved for the firms featured on late night infomercials hawking their brand of unscrupulous litigation. When one of America's most prestigious firms is accused of the aforementioned, it never sees the light of day. Why? Because the powerful and well-connected stick together, and squash the notion of improper doings from the get go. They immediately paint the accuser as a "fool" or an "idiot", whose accusations are without merit, and whose motions are attention seeking and reactionary. For more than ten years, Israel Weinstock has been fighting the labels bestowed upon him by Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, the well oiled and connected Manhattan law firm. Most would fold under the pressure, but not Israel Weinstock. He is ready for the truth to be told without the fear of retaliation.
It started out innocently enough, a standard real estate deal. It ended up convoluted and criminal. In 1983, Israel Weinstock was retained by Jack Walker of 4200 Avenue K Realty Corp. ("Realty Corp."), a corporation which was wholly owned by Jack Walker.” Realty Corp." had entered a contract for the purchase of two properties (4200/4211 Ave. K in Brooklyn, NY). The contract provided that "Realty Corp." would purchase the said properties for $1.9 million. $ 50,000 was to be paid at contract, $350,000 to be paid at the closing of the title and the balance of $1.5 million dollars by a mortgage held by the Lincoln Savings Bank. Litigation ensued when both the seller and the purchaser blamed each other for the failure of the contract to be concluded. Weinstock represented the claim against the seller. The trial ended up in a mistrial. After the mistrial, Walker had agreed to compensate Weinstock for the legal services rendered and to be rendered at the retrial, and was to recompense Weinstock with 20% of the stock in "Realty Corp." It was a gamble, but Weinstock agreed. At that time, 20% of the stock was worth $10,000 (20% of $50,000 invested), at the most. The value of the properties however had risen dramatically, and if "Realty Corp." were victorious with its case, the 20% would have substantial value. If "Realty Corp.", lost the trial, the 20% would be worthless. This is quite linear and easy to understand up to this point. Here's where the water gets murky.
Enter Emmerich Handler, Professional Plaintiff. In 1984, after Weinstock had agreed to represent Jack Walker and "Realty Corp.", Walker sued Weinstock. Walker claimed that Weinstock had defrauded him, forged his name without authority and had otherwise deprived him of his rights to a property in Lawrence, New York. Lawsuit number one--Walker v. Weinstock. Enter Emmerich Handler. Handler is a lawyer who claims to be a non practicing rabbi. His expertise lies in filing frivolous lawsuits that are intended to wear down its victims. Handler has been involved as a party in over 100 of these suits, dating back to at least 1978. The Walker v. Weinstock lawsuit was conceived by Emmerich Handler. It was commenced in 1984, at a time when Handler was engaged in a bitter battle with his law partners. The lawsuit against Weinstock was intended to enable Walker to file a lis pendens, a mechanism that would render Handler's law partners unable to sell the (Lawrence) property and be forced to carry the expenses of the mortgage and real estate taxes.
The facts were these: In 1983, Walker sold the Lawrence property to the law partnership. He was paid by a check signed by Emmerich Handler on which Handler endorsed, in his own writing, that the check constituted "full payment" for Walker's property. This clearly meant that the suit brought by Walker in 1984 against Weinstock was without merit, as Walker had no claims to the Lawrence property and no basis for a lawsuit with regards to the property. Handler had talked Walker into filing the suit, to "persuade" Weinstock to apply pressure upon Handler's law partners into succumbing to Handler's demands. Walker later admitted under oath, that the lawsuit was fabricated at the request and the expense of Handler, who retained Brooklyn attorney Robert Gutman, Esq. to "represent" Walker. Attorney Gutman had been Handler's long time friend and attorney. Emmerich Handler and his actions continue to plague and haunt Weinstock to the present day. Handler has used his claimed rabbinical status to gain trust and confidence. He has used his legal knowledge to coerce, defraud, and financially ruin those who dare challenge him on his designs. In 1978, The Court of Appeals, State of California, Second Appellate District Division, in a unanimous decision concluded:
"Defendant Handler used the respect afforded him by his rabbinical status
to deceive and defraud plaintiffs. Further both Handler and Kleinman (Handler's law partner) carried that deceit to the witness stand and, as attorneys and officers of the court, failed to show any remorse with regard to the fraud that they committed on the
When this judgment was handed down, Handler was ordered to pay compensatory and punitive damages to the plaintiffs. Rather than pay the judgment, Handler retained the services of a former counsel of the New York State Disciplinary Committee, to bring about disciplinary charges against the attorneys for the plaintiffs. He also commenced litigation against the attorney(s) in New York who were attempting to enforce the judgment. This caused the plaintiffs and their attorney’s huge expense in time and money. This is Handler's modus operandi. He loses then hires reputable, big name firms to exact punishment on those who beat him in the court of law or those who seek to protect their rights. Worn down both emotionally and financially, the plaintiffs and their attorneys exchanged releases without Handler paying one single dime of the fraud judgment.
Dishonesty, Dastardly Deeds and Near Death
As stated, in 1984 Walker had agreed to give Weinstock 20% of the corporate stock in "Realty Corp." In January 1985, the case in dispute with the seller came to trial for the second time. After a full trial, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County rendered a decision that declared that "Realty Corp." had no right to enforce the contract for the purchase of the properties. Unless the Decision was overturned on appeal, the stock was worthless. Walker then sought a release from Weinstock with respect to the admittedly false accusations that he had made against Weinstock in the previous (1984) lawsuit that had been orchestrated by Handler. On February 15, 1985 Weinstock agreed to release Walker in exchange for the 80% of the then worthless stock in "Realty Corp.". "Realty Corp's." only asset was the contract for the purchase of the two properties at 4200/4211 Avenue K in Brooklyn. The assignment to Weinstock of this corporate stock and Walker's interest in another project which Walker had abandoned (Glenwood Estates) was only a small part of several multi-party agreements signed on February 15, 1985. With all the stock now his (100% of "Realty Corp."), Weinstock proceeded to take on the appeal. He ordered the trial transcripts at his own expense, prepared the necessary briefs, and did whatever was necessary to perfect the appeal. If successful, Weinstock would have a very valuable asset. The properties in 1986 at a 1979 price. If he lost, he would gain nothing in return and lose the many thousands of dollars he had spent on the appeal process. In June of 1986, Weinstock was struck with an almost fatal blow. A cancerous tumor had ruptured in his stomach. He was diagnosed with terminal stomach cancer and was not expected to live. Most of his stomach was removed as was his spleen and part of his esophagus. He then developed peritonitis. The outlook was not good for Israel Weinstock. He was in tremendous physical pain, and he was also going through an agonizing divorce. But he kept on fighting to live, to live to take care of his children, and live to see another day.
On September 1, 1986 the Appellate Division reversed the findings of the Trial Court, on the law and the facts. Weinstock's successful appeal spawned another lawsuit against him.