(August 24, 2016) Two months ago “Rabbi” Greer sued Larry Noodles for defamation because Larry Noodles blogged that Rabbi Greer paid a student rape victim hush money. Greer never disputed the allegation of child rape. Rabbi Greer claimed that the payment of hush money was false and defamatory, ruining his reputation. Completely ridiculous! How can a man who is getting sued for child rape possibly claim that blogger Larry Noodles destroyed his reputation? Rabbi Greer is not a stupid man. Rabbi Greer has a law degree and rabbinical ordination. Yet he filed a lawsuit that has to be one of the stupidest lawsuits ever filed in the City of New Haven.
In response to Rabbi Greer’s defamation case Larry Noodles’ attorney Joseph Merly filed a motion to stay the legal proceedings pending a determination before the Rabbinical Court. Larry Noodles filed papers with the rabbinical court requesting that Rabbi Greer submit his dispute to a panel of rabbis. Larry Noodles mentioned in his motion that Willliam Ward, the attorney for Rabbi Greer, on the date of May 3, 2016, issued the following press release: “Ask yourself why Mr. Mirlis, an Orthodox Jew, would not seek redress from a rabbinical arbitration court. Ask yourself why Mr. Mirlis’s first stop was his lawyer’s office to seek money.” It would only be logical for “Rabbi” Greer to agree to submit to the rabbinical court over an allegedly defamatory statement made by Larry Noodles about hush money. Yet Rabbi Greer has objected to rabbinical court. What kind of a rabbi objects to rabbinical court?
Yesterday Rabbi Greer’s attorney filed paperwork in the Superior Court of New Haven, titled, “Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Stay Procedings.” Greer’s attorney argued in his Objection that Rabbi Greer objected to rabbincial court. Greer would prefer to remain in secular court, a court run by the goyim, rather than appear before a court run by rabbis.
Rabbi Greer doesn’t think much of the goyim. Ask Diane Mercer. She used to work for Greer as an associate attorney. This is what she said of Greer on her Facebook page: “From what I could see, he rarely bathed, was rude to everyone…..referring to me as ‘haserai’ and ‘traife’ to my face (trash, basically), not knowing I understood. I left that firm feeling like I’d made a grievous error in going to law school….” The word “haserai” is rooted in the Yiddish word for pig, “Khazir” The word “traife” refers to a non kosher animal. Rabbi Greer’s basic view of non-Jews must be that they are not kosher and are pigs.
Rabbi Greer may very well be a racist. But how do other rabbis view Rabbi Greer’s failure to take his dispute to rabbinical court? One of the most authoritative rabbis of all time on Jewish law was the Rambam (Hilchos Sanhedrin 26:7), who once stated, “Whoever has his case judged by non-Jewish laws or courts, even if their laws are the same (as the Torah), is a rosho (evil one), it is as if he blasphemed and raised his hand against the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu”.
The Code of Jewish Law, ie., the Shulhan Aruch (Hoshen Mishpat 26:1) explicitly rules that Jewish law forbids bringing one’s civil suits to a secular court. This law is inferred from the verse in the Book of Exodus (21:1), “And these are the statutes that you shall place before them.” The words “before them” are taken to mean that civil cases are to be brought “before them,” ie., qualified Rabbinical Courts, and not before secular courts. Trying cases in secular courts constitutes a particularly grave sin, as it reflects the attitude that Torah law is inferior to secular law and does not provide an adequate means of fairly resolving one’s dispute. Someone who brought litigation to a secular court without rabbinic permission may not serve as chazan for Yomim Noraim (Mishneh Berurah 53:82). This means that Rabbi Greer should not be permitted to lead the upcoming Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur religious services .
If Rabbi Greer were to win a monetary judgment against Larry Noodles in secular court, under Jewish law Rabbi Greer would be considered a gonif or a thief and would have to return any money that was in excess of what the rabbinic court would have awarded. “This secondary transgression of accepting money that the plaintiff knows he is receiving solely because the defendant feels compelled to follow the decision of the secular court while the plaintiff is aware that he is not entitled to such money according to Jewish law, is a more readily acknowledged and understood sin.”
Greer the Gonif. Gonif is a Yiddish word which translates as a thief or dishonest person or scoundrel (often used as a general term of abuse), ganef, ganof, gonif; Yiddish – a dialect of High German including some Hebrew and other words; spoken in Europe as a vernacular by many Jews; offender, wrongdoer – a person who transgresses moral or civil law.
One of the leading rabbinical commentators on the Shulhan Aruch, ie., the Code of Jewish Law, the Remo, exhorted community leaders to persuade any person involved in bringing a case to secular court to reverse such a disgrace to the Almighty and have the case heard in a Beis Din, ie., rabbinical court. He said that it is appropriate to shun not only the plaintiff but also anyone who is supportive of such a person. The Code of Jewish Law explains that not only is the plaintiff considered a rosho (wicked one), but anyone who is supportive of the plaintiff is also considered a rosho.