Dallas – Court Rules In Favor Of Synagogue In Battle Between Dallas HOA, Rabbi

    14

    Dallas – In a second round of litigation, a judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by a North Dallas neighborhood HOA against an Orthodox Jewish rabbi regarding the synagogue he runs out of his son’s home.

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    The ruling at the Collin County Courthouse this morning stated that Toras Chaim, run by Rabbi Yaakov Rich, can continue to offer religious services in the residential neighborhood of Highlands of McKamy in North Dallas reports The Dallas Morning News (http://bit.ly/1vt582G).

    The HOA of Highlands of McKamy filed the lawsuit against the congregation, stating that running a synagogue out of a home violated residential rules. The judge based his decision on the claim that the property owners’ deed restrictions violate state and federal laws protecting religious worship from government-imposed burdens.

    Vin News previously reported (http://bit.ly/16nS031) that neighbor David Schneider first filed his own lawsuit in Feb. 2014. In April 2014, a judge ruled that the synagogue would be able to continue holding religious services in the neighborhood after he denied the

    HOA’s request for an injunction.(http://bit.ly/1KrKaCw).
    Schneider, who lives across the street from the synagogue, says about 30 Orthodox Jewish families worship there. He says the lawsuit had nothing to do with religion, and that it was about traffic, the safety of the neighborhood and breaking the residential rules. He says he would feel the same if it were a school or doctor’s office operating in the neighborhood according to CBS Dallas (http://cbsloc.al/1vsE5Vc).

    Lawyers for Toras Chaim said religious freedom was being threatened.

    Schneider is not sure if he will appeal the court’s decision.


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    14 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Boochie
    Boochie
    9 years ago

    I don’t blame the neighbors, you buy a house one quiet street, then one day it’s congested

    Yossi_Schochet
    Yossi_Schochet
    9 years ago

    I was under the WRONG impression that only Chabad runs into trouble by creating shuls in residential neighbourhoods.

    Because I thought it was a Chabad invasion into neighbourhoods, I had always been sympathetic to the neighbours.

    Now I see that other frum yidden also do.

    I changed my mind: Every Jewish residential neighbourhood SHOULD indeed have a shul, a yeshiva, a girls school, a mikveh and a park!

    mgrunberg
    mgrunberg
    9 years ago

    Look at the bright side of having a shul on your block besides the spiritual advantage there us the security advantage as well. As the more people around, the less chance of a home on the block getting broken in to.

    georgewashingtonbridge
    georgewashingtonbridge
    9 years ago

    #2 “I changed my mind: Every Jewish residential neighbourhood SHOULD indeed have a shul, a yeshiva, a girls school, a mikveh and a park!”

    Don’t forget the pizza place! Or the sushi bar!

    Rafuel
    Rafuel
    9 years ago

    And whenever there is a lawsuit against a shul or an eruv, it’s always Jewish goyim who initiate the trouble. Real goyim somehow don’t care if there is house where men go to pray, much less if there is an eruv overhead. But it’s secularconservativereform (and sometimes even moderns) who are so uncomfortable with yiddishkheit, they want the goyisher governments and courts assist them at eliminating it. That’s a reminder to us that we are in golus, not that some goyim dislike us, which I almost never encounter.

    9 years ago

    Sorry but this has NOTHING to do with anti-Semitism. If you spend a million dollars for a suburban home and expect quiet and privacy, having 20-30 cars driving up for daily or even Shabbos minyanim will destroy the value of your home and your lifestyle. For yidden whose lives revolve around davening and learning, maybe this wouldn’t be an issue but for the majority of yidden who have worked hard to purchase the peace and quiet of a suburban subdivision, this is mamash hell on earth.

    yankie
    yankie
    9 years ago

    When my aunt and uncle went into Kiruv and moved out of town from new york, they established a shul (leased) in one of the spaces in a strip mall. Yes. He had a half hour walk each way but did not want to upset the neighbors with all the comings and goings. After all, they are looking to do kiruv, not distance people. They did it with saichel. They did it like a mensch. they were in that space for a few years, and as more people were becoming religious, and the shul was growing, they bought a small commercial building on a corner with a parking lot. what started out with 6 to 10 religious Jews, now has over over 200 families. point I’m making is, there is a way to do things. Not, I could do whatever I want just because it’s legal.

    savtat
    savtat
    9 years ago

    When you buy a house in a residential neighborhood, and suddenly, you find that you are having trouble parking on your own block, it’s not so much fun. I live in NYC, and sometimes, at shacharis time, people block my driveway with my cars in it. They are in a big rush to get to davening – very nice, but I need to get out and sometimes I have to wait until they davening is over. It’s not necessarily anti Jewish when you object to a minyan in a residential place. This minyan needs to find a spot in a commercial area with parking to settle permanently.

    BarryLS1
    BarryLS1
    9 years ago

    It’s understandable that the neighbor would be upset over the traffic, but his argument on the news clip was the value of his house. Contrary to his remarks, property values go up significantly when Frum Jews move in and create a further demand for housing.

    The neighbor had better arguments to chose than that one, which says something about his true motivations.

    There was no mention of problems it caused for anyone, just that it “violated community rules.”