Debate about fee continues

Re “Profiting from the Holocaust,” and “What profit? I gave up $10 million,” Current, Nov. 19

How sad that Burt Neuborne, a true champion for those victimized by the Nazis, should be forced to resort to an Op-Ed piece to defend his most reasonable fee request. How outrageous for Menachem Z. Rosensaft, himself an attorney, to criticize Neuborne’s enormous efforts in the Holocaust negotiations. In 2000, I was asked to represent the Austrian Jewish community in its Holocaust negotiations. Though I decided to represent the community pro bono, I kept this fact to myself so as not to influence those who would be requesting a reasonable fee in the event of a recovery.

When attorneys take cases on a contingent fee, no one seems to mind when there is no money to recover, but the criticism falls quickly and sharply when funds become available. Rather than being taken to task by an ungrateful Rosensaft, Neuborne should be heartily congratulated for his outstanding work on the survivors’ behalf.

PAUL R. KIESEL

Beverly Hills

*

I was executive director of the World Jewish Congress when we forced Swiss banks to disgorge the accounts of Holocaust victims they had held for more than half a century. Unlike Neuborne, the coalition that led this effort -- Jewish organizations, political leaders, law firms and human rights figures -- did so out of moral conviction, not to make a profit.

Neuborne was only one of scores of lawyers who worked on these cases. I would not liken him to a Swiss bank, but would point out that he too now seeks to enrich himself at the expense of Holocaust survivors. For shame!

ELAN STEINBERG

New York