Joel Leyden, New York Digital PR, Israel News Agency, Fraud, SEO, Abuse

7/30/2019 Joel Leyden, New York Digital PR, Israel News Agency, Fraud, SEO, Abuse

1/11

SUPREME COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORKCOUNTY OF NEW YORK

HERZFELD & RUBIN, P.C.,Plaintiff,

Index No.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

JOEL LEYDEN, Defendant.

HERZFELD & RUBIN, P.C., the Plaintiff herein by its attorney, Edward L.Birnbaum, complaining of defendant, Joel Leyden ("Joel"), alleges as follows:

1. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff is a well-respected law firm withoffices at 125 Broad Street, New York, N.Y., which with its predecessor firms, has beenengaged in the practice of law in New York for over sixty years. It is well lmown in thelegal community, anaong lawyers and judges for its professionalism, responsibility,integrity, and dedication to the interests of its clients.

2. On December 12, 2005, Plaintiff prepaxed a Will for its longtime client,Bernard Leyden ("Bernard"), the father of defendant. The Will was reviewed andrepublished when a Codicil was prepared and executed on December 3, 2007 after theinitial execution of the Will. Bernard died on January 22, 2009.

3. Bernards Will provided, among other things, for a Trust which becameeffective on Bernards death. It designated as Trustee, Brian Leyden ("Brian"), the otherson of Bernard, and the brother of Joel Leyden ("Joel"), the defendant in this action.

4. The Will was probated in New York County and the Trust is, therefore,subject to oversight by the New York County Stmogates Court.

ILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/26/2012 INDEX NO. 154004/

YSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/26/


2/11

5. The Trust was established because Bernard did not have confidence inJoels ability to manage funds and because of the frequency and severity of the physical,economic and including legal conflicts with women with whom he was not married andhis ex-wives over arrears in alimony and non-support, and their potential and actual penalconsequences. Bernard desired to create a mechanism with Brian as Trustee, whichwould safeguard the funds he was allocating for Joel from Joel~ behavioral difficulties.Accordingly, he entrusted them to Brian to be available to Joel as Brians "sole andabsolute discretion, deems necessary or advisable."

6. For many years, Joel had been residing in Israel where he had engaged ina variety of failing enterprises and relationships which required repeated support andrescue by Bernard.

7. Joel, in his computer published biography, portrays himself as an Israeliwar hero, and a seasoned, respected and responsible international public relationspractitioner, In fact, as Joel also admits in published docttments, he describes himself asevicted from his home, and separated from his children and work opportunities in Israel.He claims to b~e subject to arrest if he returns to Israel. He also claims to own hundredsof computer domains, which he buys and sells. As described below, he perverts andabuses his computer domain registrations, not merely by nuisance attacks on persons heseeks to damage, but by deliberate defamation, coercion and other violation of law.

8. Brian, as Trustee, after Bernards demise, has acted with prudence toadminister the Trust assets to prolong their availability over Joels anticipated life span,to carry out Bernards intent to avoid their being squandered by Joel and to protect themfrom Joels creditors.

996977_1 2


3/11

9. Plaintiff has acted as attorney for Brian, in his capacity as Executor of theEstate, and as Trustee. At no time has Plaintiff acted as attorney, or in may other fiduciarycapacity for Joel.

10. Approximately two years ago, Joel left or was caused to leave Israel in thecontext of failure to support and other charges in respect to his relations with his children.

11. Arriving in the United States, he contacted Brian ~and requested paymentsfrom the Trust which Brian determined were unwarranted. Negotiations with Joelsuccessive attorneys failed to resolve Joels advanced and irrational demands.

12. Thereafter, Joel commenced his campaign of harassment, threats andcoerce to force Brian to make payments from the Trust which, in Brians judgment, wereinappropriate and contrary to his obligation under the Trust.

13. Joels response to Brians rejection of Joels demands was to cause hisattorneys successively to press his demands thiough judicial action. He sued in threeseparate proceedings, ha the New York County Surrogates Court, through one or more ofsuch attorneys, or pro se. The Surrogates Court dismissed each of Joels proceedings,finding that each claim was meritless.

14. The Surrogate, in dismissing the most recent proceeding brought by Joel,directed him to stop his unsupported claims, in deference to the resources of the Court, aswell as to avoid the depletion of the assets of the Trust by his irrational and frivolousapplications.

15. Finally, the Surrogate, in August, 2011, issued an order prohibiting Joelfrom commencing any new proceeding without making a prior application to the Courtand receiving the Courts permission.

996977_1 3


4/11


5/11

extort and extract moneys from Plaintiff by forcing a coerced sale if his demands are notmet.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION - DEFAMATION20. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 19as though in full set forth.

21. Similar to his pattern of illegal coercion with num~erous other targets, on orabout May 5, 2012, acting, among others, under the fictitious name of "Jonathan Ariel,"Israel Beach" and a pretended "Israel News Agency," operated by him, Joel issued forposting in the public press, his illicit domain names, and other domain resources, a falseand malicious news article written l~eaded "Herzfeld & Rubin Accused of Malpractice,Breach of Trust." The writing falsely recites that "the case will be heard in the New YorkSupreme Court" and that "Herzfeld & Rubin has refused to answer or respond to emailsor telephone calls by "Israel News Agency" The article also recites accusations of Joel"that Herzfeld & Rubin are depleting my Trust to fund the brutal and unnecessary legalbattles," that it has taken over $80,000 in legal fees from my Trust", "that they marchoff to Court where they can find blank checks from my Trust" and "bully, intimidate andcoerce in ways one could expect from Tony Soprano, not Law and Order."

22. In a posted purported "Update," dated May 7, 2012, Joel issued a falsepurported news release that "The court decided that Daniel (Joel) was suffering fromseveral emergencies for which the Trust is responsible for addressing and has acceptedthe case." This is followed by a purported news release asserting that Plaintiff was actingas "thugs in suits to mislead both the court and legal counsel." All of the above are false,misleading and defamatory.

996977_1 5


6/11

23. In an email under the email address of Joel Leyden([email protected]), under date of May 17, 2012, Joel accused Plaintiff ofstealing $80,000 from the Trust, stating "My father, who retained HR, never intended forHerzfeld & Rubin to steal 80,000 USD of his money, my money." He also refers toPlaintiff and its personnel as "crooks." The email which he published, and caused to beposted on another illicit Herzfeld & Rubin domain name, is addressed to his attorney andvarious third parties, to give it an imprimatur of dignity and reasoned discourse. Itincludes the direction to his attorney to "Please send the news story that editor/writerJonathan Ariel wrote to the Supreme Court." The news story, the purported writer,Jonathan Ariel, and its contents, are the fictitious inventions of Joel. In another posting,he accuses Herzfeld & Rubin of"committing pmjury in court."

24. All of the foregoing recitals are false. There is no malpractice and no caseof malpractice which will be heard in the New York Supreme Court. It is not Plaintiffbut Joel who is depleting the Trust by his repeated frivolous proceedings. Herzfeld &Rubin have not taken over $80,000 from the Trust. They do not march off to Court. It isJoel who files the frivolous claims and marches to Court. They do not bully, intimate orcoerce or act like Tony Soprano. No Court has decided that Joel was suffering fromseveral emergencies. Plaintiffs are not acting like "thugs in suits." They are not stealingJoels money. The claim of perjury in court is simply more fiction.

25. , Plaintiff sustained damages for such defamation in the amount of in excessof $500,000 together with punitive damages of $500,000 damage in a total of$1,000,000.

996977_1 6


7/11

AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION DOMAIN NAMECYBERSQUATTING AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF NAME

26. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 24as though in fall set forth.

27. Plalntiffhas conducted its law practice under the name Herzfeld & Rubinfor over fifty years. In the course of its operating, it maintains a computer website ofwww.Herzfeld-Rubin.col~n in which it posts relevant informatiqn to be disseminated toclients, prospective clients and other interested parties regarding its personnel, thepractice areas in which it operates, and other facts which describe the practice.

28. Plaintiff was the attorney for Bernard Leyden. It had warm personal andprofessional relations with him for over fifty years until his demise.

29. Plaintiff has served clients throughout the United States, and many otherareas in the world including Europe, Asia and the Americas. It has succeeded inachieving respect and a highly favorable reputation with its clients, its colleagues of the

bar, and the judiciary, for its integrity, compassion, judgment, and professionalism. It iswidely regarded by clients, bench and bar as anaong the most top law firms in theprofession.

30. In about 2010, with intent to appropriate Plaintiffs good will, and todamage, denigrate and destroy the reputation of Plaintiff among members of the bar,bench, clients, potential clients, and the general public, Joel appropriated the name"HerzfeldRubin.com" and similar forms of the na111e Herzfeld & Rubin for domainnames including "Herzfeldrubin.com, HerzfeldRubin.net, Herzfeldrubin.org. He used theillicit domain naanes to post or cause to be posted, false, derogatory and maliciousmaterials about Plaintiff. He also caused to be published, circulated and posted articles on

996977_1 7


8/11

other websites, such as scambook.com, ripoffreport.com, freerepublic.com,merchantscircle.com, israelnewsagency.com, and americanconservativenews.comostensibly constituting bona fide news information being released by bona fide newssources for bona fide news outlets. He intended to cause persons seeking by computer tocontact Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., which is registered as "Herzfeld-Rubin.com, to bediverted to such illicit websites from which Joel directly and inqlirectly disseminated hisfalse, derogatory, distorted and damaging statements regarding Plaintiff.

31. The registry by Joel of the Herzfeld & Rubin domain names controlled byhim violated 15 USC Section 1125(d), New York General Business Law Section 148,and Plaintiffs common law rights.

32. Plaintiff has demanded that Joel desist from posting false and derogatoryinformation, and either discontinue the illicit domain names or transfer same to Plaintiff.

33. In response, Joel demanded a payment of $100,000 for Plaintiff topurchase the domain name "Herzfeldrubin.com" and that Plaintiff cause its client, Brian,to make the payments from the Trust which Brian had refused.

34. In addition, Joel advertised to the public offers to sell the illicit domainname for $100,000. See Exhibit "A" armexed.

35. Joel rejected Plaintiffs demand that the illicit domain name and postingsbe discontinued. He continues to maintain the domain names and to post, or causes to beposted, further false and derogatory materials regarding plaintiff.

36. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff is entitled to damages of at least$500,000 together with punitive damages of $500,000.

996977_1


9/11

AS AND FOR A THIRD CASUE OF ACTION - TORTIOUSINTERFERENCE WITH PLAINTIFFS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES37. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 35

as though in full set forth.38. By reason of the unlawful conduct described before, clients, prospective

clients and persons doing business with or desiring to do business with Plaintiff havebeen diverted from Plaintiffs website which recites the true information regardingPlaintiff to the illicit domain names, have become confused and uncertain about therecitals in Plaintiffs website, and have been deterred, from entertaining into {elationswith Plaintiff, and Plaintiff s professional reputation and status has been damaged.

39. Plaintiff has been caused to expend extensive time and energy, atsignificant costs, to investigate and determine the illicit activities and to seek counteraction thereto.

40.of in excess of $500,000 and is entitled, in addition, to punitive damages of $500,000.

AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION--PRELIMINARYAND

By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff had sustained damages in the amount

PERMANENT INJUNCTION41. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 24,

26 through 34, 37 through 39 as though in full set forth.42. By reason of the damage recited herein, Plaintiff has no adequate remedy

at law and is entitled to preliminary and permanent injunction of the maintenance of theillicit domain names and such other relief as the Court may deem proper.

9 9 6 9 7 7 1 9


10/11

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands damages of $500,000 together with punitivedamages of an additional $500,000, and interest on each of Counts 1, 2 and 3 of the

Complaint, and a preliminary and permanent injunction as to Count 4, barring andprecluding the direct and indirect issuance and posting on any domain name of materialscontaining or referring to Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C. and requiring the turnover of the illicitdomain names to Plaintiff, together such other relief as the Coul:t may deep proper, withthe costs of the action.Dated: New York, New York

June 26, 2012

By:

Edward L. Bil~aum, FA~q~F

A[ttorney for Plaintiff~25 Broad Street, 12th Floor~qew York, New Yo rk 10004(212) 471-8500

996977_1 lO


11/11

VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK )) ssCOUNTY OF NEW YORK )

EDWARD BIRNBAUM, being duly sworn deposes and says:That he is a Senior Member of the firm of HERZFELD & RUBIN, P.C., a defendant

the above-entitled action; that he has read the foregoing Verified Complaint and knows contents thereof; and that the same is true to the best of his knowledge except as to mattetherein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters he beliethem to be true.

Swqm to before me this~./;,~ day of June, 2012

NO TARY P~IBLICBERNAR D j . WALD

Notary Public, State of N ew Y orkNo. 02W A41237450Qua[ifiec/in New Y ork CouCommission Expires R,=^, ~ nty.... ~temoer 30, 2Gt~

Birnbaum

Documents

Joel Leyden, New York Digital PR, Israel News Agency, Fraud, SEO, Abuse