Appel v New York City Police Dept. 2023 NY Slip Op 30786(U) March 16, 2023
Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 155293/2022
Judge: Judy H. Kim asks the question of whether it was the Mossad who came for Plaintiff or merely life support medical personnel. The Court basically finds that it was the later.

“On or about August 10, 2020, plaintiff commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under index number l:20-cv-06265-VSB (the “Federal Action”), against the Hon. Esther Hayut (the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the State oflsrael), YosefMeir Cohen (the former head of the Mossad), Dr. Kenneth Davis (President and CEO of defendant Mount Sinai Health System, Inc.), and Dr. David Reich (President and Chief Operating Officer of Mount Sinai Hospital), alleging that these individuals were co- conspirators in a plot to torture and murder her. As pertinent here, plaintiffs complaint in the Federal Action alleged that on June 11, 2020, she published posts on Facebook and Linkedin exposing corruption in Israel’s Supreme Court (NYSCEF Doc. No. 107 [Compl. at iJ18]). As a result of these posts, plaintiff received a “threatening visit from what appear[ed] to have been Mossad assassins” on June 30, 2020, “[arriving] in a run-down van with the Mount Sinai Hospital
logo, which, upon information and belief, was not a real Mount Sinai Hospital van” (Id. at iJiJ23,25-26]). Plaintiff subsequently contacted Dr. Kenneth Davis and Dr. David Reich to confirm whether Mount Sinai Hospital sent these individuals and, if so, for what purpose (Id.). These doctors confirmed that Mount Sinai did send two clinicians to plaintiffs home, based on a referral from NYC Well (Id. at iJ26). Plaintiff alleged that these doctors were bribed to lie to her (Id. at iJ25).

During the Federal Action, plaintiff raised concerns regarding Liu’s conduct, submitting a letter application to United States District Judge John P. Cronan seeking leave to file a motion for the commencement of a criminal contempt proceeding against Liu
for her misbehavior in this action, including her filing knowingly false statements
with the Court in an attempt to cover-up blatant perjury [by Sara Kluge] and what
the facts clearly indicate was an attempted assassination attack on me on June 30, 2020.

As the facts in the Complaint show, the Sinai Defendants facilitated the provision of false information to me by the Mount Sinai Health System regarding what was, as the facts clearly indicate, an attempted assassination attack on me by Mossad operatives who arrived for me in a run-down, fake-looking van with the Mount Sinai Hospital logo on June 30, 2020 (See Doc. No. 112 [Pre-Motion Conference Request]).”

“Plaintiff has also failed to state a claim under Judiciary Law §487 (Id.). That statute
provides that “an attorney or counselor who [i]s guilty of any deceit or collusion, or consents to any deceit or collusion, with intent to deceive the court or any party … is guilty of a misdemeanor, and in addition to the punishment prescribed therefor by the penal law, he forfeits to the party injured treble damages, to be recovered in a civil action” (Judiciary Law §487[1]). However, insofar as the Opinion and Order in the Federal Action “undisputedly addressed the instant allegations raised by the plaintiff … and found them to be without merit” plaintiff’s claim cannot survive (God’s Battalion of Prayer Pentecostal Church, Inc. v Hollander, 24 Misc 3d 1250(A) [Sup Ct, Nassau County 2009] [internal citations and quotations omitted], affd, 82 AD3d 1156 [2d Dept
2011] lv to appeal denied 17 NY3d 714; see also Mtge. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v McVicar, 203 AD3d 919 [2d Dept 2022]). Even ignoring the foregoing, the complaint’s allegations regarding Liu’s purportedly deceptive acts “are conclusory and factually insufficient” (Shaffer v Gilberg, 125 AD3d 632, 635-36 [2d Dept 2015] [internal citations omitted]). Finally, plaintiff’s Judiciary Law §487 claim “must fail, as plaintiff cannot establish that [she] was deceived by the allegedly false [documents], or that [she] suffered any damages proximately caused by such deceit perpetrated on [her] or on the court” (O’Connor v Dime Sav. Bank of New York, F.S.B., 265 AD2d 313, 313-14 [2d Dept 1999] [internal citations omitted]).”