Judge OKs wall for splittin' Hasidic spouses

amother

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 11:41 am

Judge OKs wall for splittin' Hasidic spouses

A judge has ordered a soon-to-be divorced couple to live unhappily ever after in the Borough Park home they shared for 18 years - by having a wall built smack dab in the middle of their dining room.

Millionaire sweater manufacturer Simon Taub was granted permission during divorce proceedings in August to divide the home with sheetrock walls, so he wouldn't have to relinquish it to wife, Chana Taub.

Simon, 57, would have his own kitchen, bedroom and bathroom in a 900-square-foot area on two floors of the 49th St. home.

"I don't wish this on anybody," said Chana Taub, 56, whose husband owns homes across the borough, including the house next door. "I hope God will help, and somebody will straighten out this whole thing."

Chana Taub has appealed Judge Sarah Krauss' ruling. But if the decision is upheld, the former lovebirds could be walking into the same home, divided in two - just like in the 1989 film starring Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner.

The wall drama began in August when Krauss granted the wife an order of protection against Simon Taub, who owns TechKnits Inc. of Williamsburg.

But citing the husband's heart condition, Krauss approved his bid to build the wall, saying, "I am not going to be excluding him entirely from his home.

"The best way to deal with this is to split the home," Krauss said, according to court documents - even though the husband owns the house next door.

Krauss, who recused herself in December following objections from Chana Taub's attorney, Susan Settenbrino, also offered a court-mandated outline for postmatrimonial bliss.

"Neither party shall interfere with any of the electrical, plumbing, phones or other systems located in their respective portions of the marital residence," Krauss wrote.

"No litigant should have to endure this kind of abuse," Settenbrino said of Krauss' decision. "There should be recourse for such orders without having to spend $200,000 [on the appeal]."

Simon Taub's attorney, Frank Snitow, said the wall would separate portions of two floors, but only give about 25% of the home to his client.

Snitow cited the home's proximity to Simon's doctor's office, a nearby synagogue and his four kids, two of whom still live in the house with his wife. "I don't think it's an extraordinary measure under these circumstances," he said. "This is one of the largest homes in Borough Park. You could even call it a mansion."

http://www.nydailynews.com/fro......html

queen

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 11:57 am

I'd call this a chillul Hashem...... hav'g on front pg

sarahd ↓

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 1:00 pm

The judge is nuts - who does she think she is, Shlomo Hamelech?

red sea

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 1:04 pm

It is really mean to the wife to be forced to remain in close contact but by the same token its really great for the kids.

chavamom

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 1:27 pm

red sea wrote:

It is really mean to the wife to be forced to remain in close contact but by the same token its really great for the kids.

He owns the house next door!

supermom

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 1:30 pm

that is nuts!! lately seems to me some people have some screws missing up there. Confused

chen ↓

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 5:50 pm

obviously she read the Judgement of Solomon and thought she'd do the same.

stem

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 5:52 pm

Why doesn't the wife move next door? or somewhere else? Is anyone forcing her to stay in that house?

Itta

Mon, Feb 13 2006, 9:34 pm

I think she wants the house and for some reason the judge does not want to "remove" the x-husband from the premises.

the article is not so clear as to the reason the judge decided this and the circumstances leading up to this weird story....

happyone

Tue, Feb 14 2006, 5:04 am

It bothers me that tzaros of other people are discussed and judged on these boards -- and with names! For all you know the children or wife frequent this site and would be horrified to be discussed here.
We know nothing of the circumstances that led to this judgement, and know absolutely no details of circumstances to talk about it. Divorce is a painful thing to the entire family, and extended family, and I feel sorry for the family that the newspaper found it amusing to print and publicize.

Motek ↓

Tue, Feb 14 2006, 8:46 am

sarahd wrote:

The judge is nuts - who does she think she is, Shlomo Hamelech?

happyone posted what I would have expected to hear from you, after your comments in the Two Tragic Scenarios thread (which had no names)

PinkandYellow

Tue, Feb 14 2006, 9:18 pm

When I read this article, I thought it was crazy so fowarded it to my mom who works in court as a clerk in the courtroom. The following are her 2 responses word for word.

I was in the courtroom for this case.
#1 women is nuts
#2 her attorney is even crazier than her client.
#3 why should husband be kicked out of house?. If she does not want to live with him, she can move. The judge was wrong in giving her an order of protection. There was no testimony that he ever abused her, (other than yelling at her) . The judge gave an order of protection so that in case anything happens in the future, nobody can say, she asked for an o.p. and the Judge didn't give her one.
It is common and unethical practice that attys give their female clients to ask for an order of protection, so they get the house, Once they are living their alone, they basically get to keep it.

They are very rich and in all cases with money, the attorneys have nothing better to do than go to court constantly (until their clients run out of money)

AND THEN:
don't get me wrong... The guy is also nuts. There is no reason why two adults cannot get divorced without going to a state court. Obviously they are fighting over money. And if I was him, I would walk out of the marriage with just the shirt on my back. He will probably have severe health issues from the stress of the divorce. Not worth it......

↑ sarahd ↓

Wed, Feb 15 2006, 2:05 am

Motek wrote:

sarahd wrote:

The judge is nuts - who does she think she is, Shlomo Hamelech?

happyone posted what I would have expected to hear from you, after your comments in the Two Tragic Scenarios thread (which had no names)

Motek, was I judging either of the parties to the divorce? Was I discussing their problems and decisions? I think the difference in the two cases is fairly clear.

JEWISHMAMA

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 3:12 am

the judge is completely mad!

↑ Motek

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 7:06 am

sarahd wrote:

Motek, was I judging either of the parties to the divorce? Was I discussing their problems and decisions? I think the difference in the two cases is fairly clear.

not you! the thread! Where's the lashon hara alert?

the differences are clear indeed! in this thread there are names and the people are being criticized (if not condemned) and for what purpose?

and in the other thread there are no names and it's a discussion about US and OUR VIEWS about marriage

↑ sarahd

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 2:26 pm

Is it lashon hara to say about someone that they're getting divorced? I didn't think so, but I could be wrong.

shayna82

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 2:50 pm

I think it is, someone on here might know them, even if no one knows them. This story is just added to the long unbelievable list of stories about frum people that unfortunatly happen. its so sad. some people need a lot of help. Im sorry but I feel bad for the wife. the husband sounds controlling and abusive. if he owns so many houses, just leave her be and find somewher else to live. that is going to be very UNHEALTHY for the kids, to have both parents at the same residence but not married? isnt that considered not tznius, since they will be then divorced? this raises lots of questions.

Crayon210

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 3:00 pm

What about the husband sounds "controlling and abusive"?

↑ chen

Thu, Feb 16 2006, 4:12 pm

shayna82 wrote:

to have both parents at the same residence but not married? isnt that considered not tznius, since they will be then divorced? this raises lots of questions.

I think the whole point is that they are building walls down the middle of the house to separate it into two separate residences, like a 2-family house. the article said he would have his own kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, and they are obviously splitting the dining room in two. (Hmmm...I guess the pesach kitchen is history.)

so, no, I don't think there is a tznius issue, but it couldn't possibly be comfortable for a split-up couple to live right next door to each other--esp. since this doesn't sound like a so-called "amicable" divorce. (Can there be such a thing as an amicable divorce? if they're so amicable, why are they divorcing?)