Macklowe Fights Trial

The main spotlight in Harry Macklowe's domain this week shined on Madison Avenue, part of which was closed for the second time during the Christmas rush because of bricks tumbling off a $35 million, 39-story building the Manhattan real estate magnate owns between 54th and 55th Streets.

Meanwhile, his ongoing battles with Martha Stewart, an East Hampton neighbor on Georgica Close Road, took a dramatic turn on Friday, when Mr. Macklowe filed a suit in Suffolk County Court alleging that various village officials, including Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr., have conspired in an "all-out 'vendetta' " against him.

The village's special prosecutor, Daniel G. Rodgers of Riverhead, called the allegations "simply not true. There's no basis in fact for what they're stating."

Trial Delayed

County Court Judge Gary J. Weber called a temporary halt on Friday to a trial scheduled in East Hampton Town Justice Court Tuesday, on charges that Mr. Macklowe had violated the East Hampton Village Code.

The delay will allow the judge to consider Mr. Macklowe's request to move the trial from East Hampton to Southampton Town Justice Court.

Mr. Macklowe's motion to Justice Weber claims that "a change of venue is required because the extraordinarily hostile political climate in the Village of East Hampton . . . directed at defendants has so imbued these proceedings with bias that a fair trial . . . cannot be had."

Allegations

It further alleges that Mayor Rickenbach has applied particular "pressure" to "harass" Mr. Macklowe, that the village's pursuit of zoning charges against him is in retaliation for lawsuits he had filed against the village, that the village is guilty of an "improper favoring of [Ms.] Stewart," that the village's special prosecutor has breached a lawyer's code of ethics, and that there is "a deep-seated official bias and hostility against defendants on the part of the village community and within village government."

The suit also refers to "the spate of local press coverage concerning these matters."

Mayor Rickenbach responded this week that "his allegations are baseless and without foundation. They're flailing in the wind."

Mr. Rodgers responded on Tuesday that the allegations were "smoke and mirrors." In particular, he said the allegations of political pressure and ethical breaches were "simply not true."

"They're trying to weave a conspiracy, and I just don't see it," Mr. Rodgers said. "There's no basis for any of that."

Mr. Macklowe faces six zoning charges in Town Justice Court for allegedly authorizing landscaping, electrical work, and fencing within a regulated wetland area without a wetlands permit.

Three of the charges, dated June 10, 1996, would have been the subject of Tuesday's trial; the others were filed this summer.

Stay Ordered

Until he decides on Mr. Macklowe's request for a new venue, Judge Weber ordered Mr. Rodgers and both East Hampton Town Justices, Roger W. Walker and Catherine A. Cahill, to refrain "from conducting any further proceedings in both" sets of charges.

Mr. Rodgers has until tomorrow to respond formally to the papers filed by Mr. Macklowe's attorneys, Paul R. Levenson of Manhattan and Michael G. Walsh of Water Mill - a thick stack that includes affidavits, village correspondence, and articles from The Star and other publications.

Last week's stay was the latest in a string of legal delays on the charges, which stem from activities that allegedly took place in 1995.

The move aggravated the special prosecutor, who said at a special appearance in East Hampton Town Court Monday afternoon that he had worked 32 hours over the weekend preparing for the trial.

Application Question

Mr. Macklowe and his neighbor, the lifestyle expert Ms. Stewart, have been embroiled in a battle over the boundary between their waterfront properties on the east side of Georgica Pond. They were notified in 1995 that landscaping there required East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals review.

Both were instructed to apply for wetlands permits. Ms. Stewart did, and eventually received permission; Mr. Macklowe withdrew his application just before it was to go to a hearing.

No Plea Bargain

The village claims that subsequent materials submitted were incomplete. His attorney, however, claims otherwise and that the Zoning Board has refused to act.

The latest development in the neighbors' zoning disputes is covered separately in today's Star.

Mr. Rodgers said "the village has bent over backwards" in trying to get Mr. Macklowe to comply with village law, saying that he and his agents "have refused" to correct the violations.

He said as recently as September he offered a plea bargain with a six-month adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, but the offers met with rejection.

Mr. Walsh claims this is because the offers came with a condition that his client's lawsuits against the village be dropped.

Subpoenas "Oppressive"

"I'm not going to even comment on that one," Mr. Rodgers said this week.

Also last week, Mr. Walsh sought to have subpoenas issued by Justice Walker at the request of the prosecutor for Tuesday's trial quashed. The subpoenas were "defective . . . arbitrary, unnecessary, and oppressive, and issued merely for the purpose of harassment," according to Mr. Walsh's legal papers.

Justice Cahill, who was the presiding judge when Mr. Walsh's request came in, referred it to Justice Walker, who has handled the case from the beginning. He called for a Monday hearing on Mr. Walsh's arguments, but could not proceed in light of Judge Weber's order.

Wrong Defendant?

In an interview this week, Justice Walker said he saw no wrongdoing on the bench.

"I have been impartial throughout this whole thing," Justice Walker said. "I in no way lean on one side or the other."

The subpoenas, for Bruce A. Anderson of Suffolk Environmental Consulting in Bridgehampton, Jack Whitmore of Whitmore and Worsley in Amagansett, Donald Bousson, Mr. Macklowe's caretaker, and Edward Bulgin of Andreassen and Bulgin Construction in Southampton, were "perfectly legitimate," Mr. Rodgers said. "It's incumbent upon me to establish each and every part of this case."

Mr. Walsh claimed in court in September, the last time Mr. Macklowe was scheduled to go to trial before his last-minute motions delayed it, that his client should not have been named as a defendant.

Earlier Petition

He told the court that Mr. Macklowe "does not own the property . . . and he is not a shareholder or stockholder of KAM Hampton I Realty Corp.," the corporation that holds the deed.

Last June, however, a petition filed in a lawsuit against the village and Ms. Stewart by KAM Hampton and Harry and Linda Macklowe, states that "KAM Hampton I Realty Corp. . . . is a New York corporation owned by Harry and Linda Macklowe. . . . Mr. and Mrs. Macklowe and their family use the KAM Hampton premises as a summer residence." It also includes Mr. Macklowe's statement that "I am the president of KAM Hampton I Realty . . . ."