Jewish Theological Seminary Continues
to Litigate Against Tenants
By Vajra Kilgour

Nearly a year and a half ago, a group of rent-stabilized tenants in two buildings on West 122nd Street won a victory in Housing Court when Judge Laurie Lau ruled that the Jewish Theological Seminary could not evict them to make dormitory space for its students (Tenant/Inquilino, Feb. ’99). The decision was based on a well-established principle of law governing corporations: At the time the tenants had moved into their homes, JTS had transferred ownership of the buildings to a for-profit corporation, of which the seminary was the sole shareholder. Under the law, JTS could only evict the tenants if it had owned the buildings at the time they took occupancy. Judge Lau declined to allow the seminary to pierce its own corporate veil, finding that it could not, after having availed itself of the advantages of having a separate corporation own the buildings, now escape the disadvantages.

During the past year, the seminary led the tenants to believe that it did not intend to perfect an appeal of Judge Lau’s decision, but only wanted to resolve remaining issues pertaining to lease renewals and attorneys’ fees. When JTS did not ultimately resolve these issues, the tenants’ lawyer, Catharine A. Grad of Grad & Weinraub, moved to dismiss its appeal. As soon as the seminary realized that the tenants were moving to dismiss the appeal and seek attorneys’ fees from the court, it once again threatened continued litigation if the tenants did not give up their homes. In mid-April, it advised them that it would continue with the lawsuits if they did not accept a buyout offer: Anyone who would agree, by May 15, to move by September 1 would get $25,000—a fraction of the value of a rent-stabilized lease, and scarcely enough to cover increased rent in a new apartment for more than a year or two. If 10 or more tenants accepted, the seminary offered to give them $30,000, apparently in the hope that the tenants would be willing, for $5,000 apiece, to take it upon themselves to help the seminary empty the buildings of rent-regulated tenants. On May 26, when it became clear that the tenants were not going to be intimidated, the seminary cross-moved, asking for more time to perfect an appeal. In its motion, it falsely alleged that it had devoted the entire past year and a half to negotiating with the tenants, offering them both alternative housing and buyouts all along. The irony of the fabrication is underscored by the fact that it was JTS that was offered—and rejected—alternative housing for students, in a new dorm being built by Columbia University.

Catharine Grad does not believe that JTS has a good-faith basis to pursue its lawsuit: “The seminary is well aware that there is no legal basis to challenge the decision of Judge Laurie Lau. It is not continuing litigation because it believes it can ultimately prevail in the courts; it’s simply hoping that the tenants will get tired of all the litigation and give up. Obviously the seminary doesn’t understand that the tenants will continue to do what is necessary to protect their homes, where they’ve been living for decades. And it is very sad to think that an educational or religious institution would have such a callous disregard for the lives of the people in the community.”