BishopAccountability.org
	Court Sides with Rabbi in Sex Suit By Owen Moritz New York Daily News September 6, 2007 http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/bronx/2007/09/06/2007-09-06_court_sides_with_rabbi_in_sex_suit.html A controversial rabbi has fended off a lawsuit that charged he seduced a woman in his congregation by telling her she needed "sex therapy" to help find her a husband. A divided appellate court ruled 3-2 that Adina Marmelstein's "thinly veiled claims of seduction" against Rabbi Mordecai Tendler are prohibited by civil rights law, and therefore she has no grounds to sue him. But attorneys for the woman vowed to appeal based on arguments from the court's two dissenting members - one of whom, Judge John Sweeny, wrote that Tendler "clearly exploited the vulnerability" of Marmelstein "to attain his own ends." The contentious case has rocked the Orthodox Jewish community because of Tendler's so-called "sexual therapy sessions," and led to the rabbi's dismissal from the Rabbinical Council of America. According to court papers, Marmelstein, 43, first met Tendler back in 1994, began attending services at his Rockland County synagogue in 1996, and in November 2000 began a sexual relationship with the rabbi, a father of eight, that ended in May 2005. Tendler, 53, a well-known advocate of woman's rights and counselor to Orthodox women seeking religious divorces, agreed to help Marmelstein in her quest for a husband and children. He allegedly told her he "was as close to God as anyone could get." The woman was advised to have sexual intercourse with Tendler so that her "life will open up and men will come to her," according to the court's summary of the case. The relationship ended, Marmelstein alleges in court papers, when the rabbi "physically and emotionally abused her for his own sexual pleasure and gratification." Tendler threatened that he'd put her in a straitjacket if she told anyone, according to the papers. Supreme Court Justice Jane Solomon on June 20, 2006, dismissed two of Marmelstein's claims - fraud and negligent infliction of emotional distress - but denied Tendler's motion to dismiss the woman's two other claims for breach of fiduciary duty and intentional infliction of emotional distress. This led to last week's appellate court opinion, written by Justice Joseph Sullivan, that reversed Solomon's ruling and threw out Marmelstein's two remaining claims. Contact: omoritz@nydailynews.com
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.