Moskovitz files notice to sue town and officials
Manalapan Committeewoman Michelle Roth says attorneys advised governing body
BY MARK ROSMAN Staff Writer
It appears that Manalapan municipal officials and attorney Stuart Moskovitz will be tangled up in legal matters for some time to come.

On Sept. 21, Moskovitz notified Manalapan Township Administrator Tara Lovrich that he is pursuing a legal claim against Manalapan and three members of the Township Committee: Richard Klauber, Michelle Roth and Andrew Lucas.

Klauber is serving as Manalapan's mayor in 2009.

In his correspondence to Lovrich, Moskovitz states, "The occurrence and transaction giving rise to the claim asserted is the filing of a malicious and frivolous lawsuit against me in the name of the Township of Manalapan, by certain officials of that township, and the continued prosecution of that lawsuit in the face of overwhelming evidence that it was frivolous."

Roth, however, said officials instituted the malpractice lawsuit against Moskovitz "after following the advice of several township attorneys and after having received an affidavit of merit from an expert confirming that a good faith basis for a legal malpractice claim existed."

Moskovitz's notice of claim states, "It incorporates the malicious comments by certain officials during the course of the litigation, including the impertinent, false and defamatory statements made by certain officials in concluding said litigation, as well as the deliberate breach by officials of promises made to the judge in continuing the litigation after all parties had agreed to a method of termination.

"The actions by those officials led to significant financial damage including loss of business, as well as significant billable time put forth in defending the frivolous and malicious action," Moskovitz wrote in the notice of claim.

He was referring to a lawsuit Manalapan officials filed against him in June 2007. The lawsuit alleged that Moskovitz committed malpractice while he was serving as the township attorney in 2005. The alleged malpractice centered on the preparation of a contract of sale by Moskovitz in connection with the purchase of land by the municipality.

The township's lawsuit against Moskovitz was dismissed in July by a state Superior Court judge. Moskovitz represented himself in the case that was known as Manalapan v. Moskovitz.

Moskovitz went on to state in his notice to the township, "The public entity involved in the offense is the Township of Manalapan, and the individuals primarily responsible for the offensive actions causing the injury, damage or loss include Michelle Roth, Richard Klauber and Andrew Lucas.

"The amount of damage to be claimed is $400,000 in actual damages. Pursuant to statutory authority, we will also be pursuing punitive damages against the individuals in the amount of $2,000,000. Actual damages are based on computation of hours expended in the defense of the matter, as well as court costs and disbursements, together with the reasonably anticipated revenue from the lost business …

"You should also be aware that Section 59:10-4 of the Tort Claims Act does not permit the municipality to indemnify public employees either directly or through its insurance carrier, where the acts committed were those of malice. Accordingly, any individual involved in the wasting of taxpayers funds by arranging for such illegal indemnification may well be subject to a taxpayers' suit for reimbursement to the public coffers of all such costs encountered, including resulting increased insurance policy costs for subsequent years," Moskovitz wrote in his notice of claim to Lovrich.

Roth offered the following statement in response to the notice of claim filed by Moskovitz, "The Township Committee instituted the malpractice lawsuit after following the advice of several township attorneys and after having received an affidavit of merit from an expert confirming that a good faith basis for a legal malpractice claim existed.

"Mr. Moskovitz never produced any expert reports to contest ours. Therefore, the township's affidavit of merit was never challenged or refuted by any legal malpractice expert in this matter.

"Prior to the most recent motion, Mr. Moskovitz had filed several other motions seeking to dismiss the complaint against him. Those motions to dismiss were all denied. Several motions to dismiss Mr. Moskovitz's third party complaints against other individuals, however, were granted earlier this year.

"The Township Committee ultimately had to confront the fact that Mr. Moskovitz made a deliberate decision not to report the action to his malpractice insurance carrier. As a result, any award would have to be obtained from Mr. Moskovitz personally.

"Although our action was supported by the advice of several township attorneys and buttressed by an expert affidavit of merit, the Township Committee determined it was more fiscally responsible to voluntarily dismiss the action than to expend municipal resources to litigate in the hope a recovery might be available.

"Mr. Moskovitz's notice of tort is the only frivolous action in this matter. His notice conveniently ignores that a legal malpractice expert filed an affidavit of merit finding a good faith claim for legal malpractice existed. It is significant to note that Mr. Moskovitz's filing also states that he intends to file future actions, for events that he admits have not even transpired. Claims concerning hypothetical future events are also certainly frivolous.

"The township will also be guided by its insurance carrier and legal counsel concerning coverage for these frivolous claims, rather than by the threats of Mr. Moskovitz," Roth said in her response.

Contact Mark Rosman at gmntnews@gmnews.com.