Abraham Backenroth



Backenroth, Frankel & Krinsky, LLP  89 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10017

    • The Wizard Behind The Curtain

      Abraham Backenroth, Mark Frankel and Scott Krinsky, LLP (BFK) knowingly and deliberately conspired with the defendants as they conceived of, and perpetrated this entire fraud. They further advised, guided, and supported defendants Jack Lefkowitz, and Abraham Steinwurzel personally, as they perpetuated their breach of fiduciary. (Alleged in the Trustee’s June 16, 2008 complaint.) BFK have a long history with these debtor/conspirators, and they knew exactly what they were doing and with whom they were doing it as they threw every conceivable legal (and illegal) impediment in the path of recovery for HMH (The Griffins). On July 20th 2005, they conspired with the creditor’s attorney, Gerald Orseck to enter into an unauthorized settlement. BFK insisted on litigating this issue for eighteen months but the result was still the same…Gerald Orseck was not authorized to settle with this debtor. This was a deliberate strategy to keep their client on as a debtor in possession of the Griffin’s property. On May 5th, 2008, BFK maliciously set out to impede both HMH (The Griffins), and the Trustee after they had reached a mediated settlement of their issues. By thus conspiring with Lefkowitz and Steinwurzel in their quest to survive nearly four years on the Griffin’s property without paying for it, BFK has demonstrated that they are irredeemably “ethically challenged” and must be judicially sanctioned! (Rule 130.1 and Judiciary Law 487.)
      HMH (The Griffins) gave BFK, LLP many opportunities to “get it right” but BFK continually chose to “get it wrong!” They are complicit not only in the defendants’ breach of fiduciary, but as legal professionals, they actively assisted the debtors in their “scorched earth” campaign against creditor HMH (The Griffins): i.e.: falsification of documents and schedules, frivolous filings, conspiracies, frauds, perjuries, false allegations, etc.

      Complaint Was Filed With Chief Counsel: Alan W. Friedburg of The New York State Departmental Disciplinary Committee For The First Department.

      BFK mounted what can only be described as a personal vendetta against HMH, Paul & Irene Griffin. They have done so even to the extent of acting against the best interests of their own client (Kollel Mateh Efraim) and the creditors of the Kollel estate. BFK is deliberately seeking to sabotage a favorable settlement with the trustee in their own client’s bankruptcy solely to please their real client, the trustee of Maskil el Dal (aka Jack Lefkowitz) who is under pressure from the trustee’s lawsuits and who is also seeking to sabotage the settlement in order to gain leverage in these lawsuits. No doubt that there is an element of vengeance and retaliation for the complaint that HMH filed with the Disciplinary Committee against the firm. Due to their client (Kollel Mateh Efraim, aka Maskil El Dal, aka Jack Lefkowitz) seeking protection within the bankruptcy courts, HMH was forced into their own chapter 11 filing. BFK sought to sabotage HMH’s chapter 11 bankruptcy case, even against the interests of their own professed status as an administrative creditor.

      Collusion appears to be taking place between BFK and the purported creditor Maskil El-Dal Incorporated. BFK’s purported Chapter 11 administrative claim ($450,000.00) arises from the services it allegedly rendered on behalf of the debtor, (Kollel Mateh Efraim) and in connection with the Chapter 11 phase of this case. Having served as attorneys for the Chapter 11 Debtor, BFK cannot represent any other creditor in this case. Nevertheless, on several occasions in its Objection to the trustee’s stipulation, BFK refers not only to its own purported claim against the estate, but also to that of Maskil El-Dal. Indeed, BFK explicitly states that it has conferred with the Trustee for Maskil El-Dal and it likewise opposes both the motion and settlement BFK clearly has no standing to make such an assertion on behalf of Maskil El-Dal, and in fact, has a conflict in doing so, particularly in light of the fact that, according to his sworn testimony at his Bankruptcy Rule 2004 examination in this case, Jack Lefkowitz, the former Managing Member of the Debtor, was also a Trustee of Maskil El-Dal. BFK’s continued references to Maskil El-Dal’s purported claims and positions in this case give rise to the question of whose interests BFK is truly pursuing in this matter. The fact that the principal of the debtor, and the principal of the purported creditor are personified in the same individual, (Jack Lefkowitz) is another cause for investigation into BFK’s conspiratorial relationship.

      Additionally, it is our firm belief that BFK deliberately created the circumstances surrounding an earlier, Unauthorized Settlement in this case. (An order was never settled.) Yet, BFK spent nearly eighteen months in a unilateral effort to cloak our previous attorney with an authority that he did not have. Facing overwhelming evidence that Gerald Orseck was not authorized to enter into a settlement, (affirmed in his own admissions, affidavits, pleadings and depositions) BFK nevertheless mounted a vigorous, eighteen month frenzied campaign, complete with strategic adjournments (designed to buy their DIP client a longer “stay” on our resort property) all in an effort to cram down this non-existent settlement. The court ruled that this had, in fact been an unauthorized settlement.

read more

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.