Being a judge over the two rival factions of Satmar Hasidim has probably never felt more like contemplating for a new career.

Being a judge for anyone unlucky enough to have presided over the recent court wrangles between two rival factions of Satmar Hasidim has probably never felt more like contemplating a new career.
What's a judge to do, for example, when opposing lawyers show up in court claiming to represent the same organizations?
Or when a directive meant to clarify a critical issue instantly appears on the Internet and kicks off a synagogue riot a few days later?
Or when partisans feverishly tracking the case with the speed of a cell-phone call scrutinize a judge's personal relationships and campaign contributions and fling accusations of bias, or worse, bribery?
Any judge plunged into the claustrophobic Satmar world and its high-stakes power struggle can expect this and more. Just ask Stewart Rosenwasser, an acting state Supreme Court justice in Orange County, who last week rendered the most recent decision in a seemingly endless cycle of litigation between the warring factions.
Insinuations of bias got so strong in his case that he summoned the attorneys to his chambers in October to insist he was neutral and let them ask for his recusal if they felt otherwise. He had just discovered that someone dug up his personal cell phone records, presumably to determine which lawyers and involved parties he had spoken to.
One year earlier, a Supreme Court justice handling a separate but related Satmar case in Brooklyn, let loose with a long, angry epilogue to his decision that cataloged the unusual shenanigans that accompanied his case.
"Chambers have been daily inundated by calls from individuals using pseudonyms and falsely claiming to be reporters or attorneys," Justice Melvin Barasch complained in his litany.

Satmar has been fighting for five years over which faction controls the property and other assets of the sect's main congregation in Brooklyn.