UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 13D

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No. 2)

NORTHEAST COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC.

(Name of Issuer)

Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
(Title of Class of Securities)

664112 10 9

(CUSIP Number)

Mr. Joseph Stilwell

111 Broadway, Suite 1203

New York, New York 10006

Telephone:  (212) 269-5800

with a copy to:

Spencer L. Schneider, Esq.

70 Lafayette Street, 7^th Floor

New York, New York 10013

Telephone:  (212) 233-7400

 (Name, Address and Telephone Number of Person

Authorized to Receive Notices and Communications)

July 23, 2010
(Date of Event which Requires Filing of this Statement)

If the filing person has previously filed a statement on Schedule 13G to report the acquisition that is the subject of this Schedule 13D, and is filing this schedule because of §§240.13d-1(e), 240.13d-1(f) or 240.13d-1(g), check the following box. [   ]

The information required on the remainder of this cover page shall not be deemed to be "filed" for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Act") or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section of the Act but shall be subject to all other provisions of the Act (however, see the Notes).

Item 1.  Security and Issuer

This is the second amendment ("Second Amendment") to the original Schedule 13D, which was filed on November 5, 2007 (the "Original Schedule 13D"), and amended on June 28, 2010 ("First Amendment").  This Second Amendment is being filed jointly by Stilwell Value Partners IV, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("Stilwell Value Partners IV"); Stilwell Associates, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("Stilwell Associates"); Stilwell Partners, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("Stilwell Partners"); Stilwell Value LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Stilwell Value LLC"), and the general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV and Stilwell Associates; and Joseph Stilwell, the managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC and the general partner of Stilwell Partners.  All the filers of this statement are collectively referred to herein as the "Group."

This statement relates to the common stock, par value $0.01 per share ("Common Stock"), of NorthEast Community Bancorp, Inc. (the "Issuer").  The address of the principal executive offices of the Issuer is 325 Hamilton Avenue, White Plains, New York 10601.  The amended joint filing agreement of the members of the Group is attached as Exhibit 2 to the First Amendment.

Item 2.  Identity and Background

(a)-(c)  This statement is filed by Joseph Stilwell, with respect to the shares of Common Stock beneficially owned by Joseph Stilwell, including shares of Common Stock held in the names of Stilwell Value Partners IV, Stilwell Associates and Stilwell Partners, in Joseph Stilwell's capacities as the general partner of Stilwell Partners and the managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC, which is the general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV and Stilwell Associates.

The business address of Stilwell Value Partners IV, Stilwell Associates, Stilwell Partners, Stilwell Value LLC and Joseph Stilwell is 111 Broadway, Suite 1203, New York, New York 10006.

The principal employment of Joseph Stilwell is investment management.  Stilwell Value Partners IV, Stilwell Associates and Stilwell Partners are private investment partnerships engaged in the purchase and sale of securities for their own accounts.  Stilwell Value LLC is in the business of serving as the general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV, Stilwell Associates and related partnerships.

(d)  During the past five years, no member of the Group has been convicted in a criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations or similar misdemeanors).

(e)  During the past five years, no member of the Group has been a party to a civil proceeding of a judicial or administrative body of competent jurisdiction and, as a result of such proceeding, was or is subject to a judgment, decree or final order enjoining future violations of, or prohibiting or mandating activities subject to, Federal or State securities laws or finding any violation with respect to such laws.

(f)  Joseph Stilwell is a citizen of the United States.

Item 3.  Source and Amount of Funds or Other Consideration

The amount of funds expended since the filing of the First Amendment by Stilwell Associates to acquire 10,000 shares of Common Stock totaled $50,300.  Such funds were provided from Stilwell Associates' working capital and, from time to time, in part by margin account loans from subsidiaries of Morgan Stanley extended in the ordinary course of business.

All purchases of shares of Common Stock made by the Group using funds borrowed from Morgan Stanley or Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, if any, were made in margin transactions on their usual terms and conditions.  All or part of the shares of Common Stock owned by members of the Group may from time to time be pledged with one or more banking institutions or brokerage firms as collateral for loans made by such entities to members of the Group.  Such loans generally bear interest at a rate based on the broker's call rate from time to time in effect.  Such indebtedness, if any, may be refinanced with other banks or broker-dealers.

Item 4.  Purpose of Transaction

Our purpose in acquiring shares of Common Stock of the Issuer is to profit from the appreciation in the market price of the shares of Common Stock and through the payment of dividends by asserting shareholder rights.  A majority of the Issuer's outstanding shares are held by NorthEast Community Bancorp, MHC, which is controlled by the Issuer's Board.  We do not believe the value of the Issuer's assets is adequately reflected in the current market price of the Issuer's Common Stock.  We hope to work with the Issuer's management to maximize shareholder value.

We are filing this Second Amendment to report that we have sued the Issuer to compel it to produce its shareholder list.

On July 1, 2010, we delivered a written demand to the Issuer demanding to inspect and copy the Issuer's shareholder list by July 14, 2010.  The Issuer refused to comply with the demand and placed conditions on compliance which we believe are not contained in the governing rule.  Therefore, on July 23, 2010, we filed a lawsuit against the Issuer in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled Stilwell Value Partners IV, L.P. v. Northeast Community Bancorp, Inc., 10 CV 5623 (WHP) seeking an order compelling compliance.  A copy of the complaint is attached as Exhibit 3.  We also moved by order to show cause for a preliminary injunction compelling the Issuer to comply with our list demand, and the Court has scheduled a hearing on the motion for July 29, 2010.

Since 2000, affiliates of the Group have filed Schedule 13Ds to report greater than five percent positions in 17 other publicly traded companies.  For simplicity, these affiliates are referred to as the "Group", "we", "us", or "our."  In each instance, our purpose has been to profit from the appreciation in the market price of the shares we held by asserting shareholder rights.  In each situation, we believed that the values of the companies' assets were not adequately reflected in the market prices of their shares.  The filings are described below.

On May 1, 2000, we filed a Schedule 13D to report a position in Security of Pennsylvania Financial Corp. ("SPN").  We scheduled a meeting with senior management to discuss ways to maximize the value of SPN's assets.  On June 2, 2000, prior to the scheduled meeting, SPN and Northeast Pennsylvania Financial Corp. announced SPN's acquisition.  We then sold our shares on the open market.

On July 7, 2000, we filed a Schedule 13D to report a position in Cameron Financial Corporation ("Cameron").  We exercised our shareholder rights by, among other things, requesting that Cameron management hire an investment banker, demanding Cameron's list of shareholders, meeting with Cameron's management, demanding that Cameron invite our representatives to join the board, writing to other Cameron shareholders to express our dismay with management's inability to maximize shareholder value and publishing that letter in the local press.  On October 6, 2000, Cameron announced its sale to Dickinson Financial Corp., and we sold our shares on the open market.

On January 4, 2001, following the announcement by Community Financial Corp. ("CFIC") of the sale of two of its four subsidiary banks and its intention to sell one or more of its remaining subsidiaries, we filed a Schedule 13D to report our position.  We reported that we acquired CFIC stock for investment purposes.  On January 25, 2001, CFIC announced the sale of one of its remaining subsidiaries.  We then announced our intention to run an alternate slate of directors at the 2001 annual meeting if CFIC did not sell the remaining subsidiary by then.  On March 27, 2001, we wrote to CFIC confirming that CFIC had agreed to meet with one of our proposed nominees to the board.  On March 30, 2001, before our meeting took place, CFIC announced its merger with First Financial Corporation, and we sold our shares on the open market.

On February 23, 2001, we filed a Schedule 13D to report a position in Montgomery Financial Corporation ("Montgomery").  On April 20, 2001, we met with Montgomery's management, and suggested that they maximize shareholder value by selling the institution.  We also informed management that we would run an alternate slate of directors at the 2001 annual meeting unless Montgomery were sold.  Eleven days after we filed our Schedule 13D, however, Montgomery's board amended its bylaws to make it more difficult for us to run an alternate slate by limiting the pool of potential nominees to local persons with a banking relation and shortening the deadline to nominate an alternate slate.  We located qualified nominees under the restrictive bylaw provisions and noticed our slate within the deadline.  On June 5, 2001, Montgomery announced that it had hired a banker to explore a sale.  On July 24, 2001, Montgomery announced its merger with Union Community Bancorp.

On June 14, 2001, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in HCB Bancshares, Inc. ("HCBB").  On September 4, 2001, we reported that we had entered into a standstill agreement with HCBB, under which HCBB agreed to: (a) add a director selected by us, (b) consider conducting a Dutch tender auction, (c) institute annual financial targets, and (d) retain an investment banker to explore alternatives if it did not achieve the financial targets.  On October 22, 2001, our nominee, John G. Rich, Esq., was named to the board.  On January 31, 2002, HCBB announced a modified Dutch tender auction to repurchase 20% of its shares.  Although HCBB's outstanding share count decreased by 33% between the filing of our original Schedule 13D and August 2003, HCBB did not achieve the financial target.  On August 12,

On December 15, 2000, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Oregon Trail Financial Corp. ("OTFC").  In January 2001, we met with the management of OTFC to discuss our concerns that management was not maximizing shareholder value, and we proposed that OTFC voluntarily place our nominees on the board.  OTFC rejected our proposal, and we announced our intention to solicit proxies to elect a board nominee.  We demanded OTFC's shareholder list, but it refused.  We sued OTFC in Baker County, Oregon, and the court ruled in our favor and sanctioned it.  We also sued two OTFC directors alleging that one had violated OTFC's residency requirement and that the other had committed perjury.  Both suits were dismissed pre-trial but we filed an appeal in one suit and were permitted to re-file the other suit in state court.  On August 16, 2001, we started soliciting proxies to elect Kevin D. Padrick, Esq. to the board.  We argued in our proxy materials that OTFC should have repurchased its shares at prices below book value.  OTFC announced the hiring of an investment banker.  Then, the day after the 9/11 attacks, OTFC sued us in Portland and moved to invalidate our proxies; the court denied the motion and the election proceeded.

On October 12, 2001, OTFC's shareholders elected our candidate by a 2-1 margin.  In the five months after the filing of our first proxy statement (i.e., from August 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001), OTFC repurchased approximately 15% of its shares.  On March 12, 2002, we entered into a standstill agreement with OTFC.  OTFC agreed to:  (a) achieve annual targets for return on equity, (b) reduce their current capital ratio, (c) obtain advice from an investment banker regarding annual 10% stock repurchases, (d) re-elect our director to the board, (e) reimburse a portion of our expenses, and (f) withdraw their lawsuit.  On February 24, 2003, OTFC and FirstBank NW Corp. announced their merger, and we sold substantially all of our shares on the open market.

On November 25, 2002, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in American Physicians Capital, Inc. ("ACAP").  The Schedule 13D disclosed that on January 18, 2002, Michigan's insurance department had approved our request to solicit proxies to elect two directors to ACAP's board.  On January 29, 2002, we noticed our intention to nominate two directors at the 2002 annual meeting.  On February 20, 2002, we entered into a three-year standstill agreement with ACAP, providing for ACAP to add our nominee, Spencer L. Schneider, Esq., to its board.  ACAP also agreed to consider using a portion of its excess capital to repurchase ACAP's shares in each of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003 so that its outstanding share count would decrease by 15% for each of those years.  In its 2002 fiscal year, ACAP repurchased 15% of its outstanding shares; these repurchases were highly accretive to per-share book value.  On November 6, 2003, ACAP announced a reserve charge and that it would explore options to maximize shareholder value.  It also announced that it would exit the healthcare and workers' compensation insurance businesses.  ACAP then announced that it had retained Sandler O'Neill & Partners, L.P., to assist the board.  On December 2, 2003, ACAP announced the early retirement of its President and CEO.  On December 23, 2003, ACAP named R. Kevin Clinton its new President and CEO.  On June 24, 2004, ACAP announced that it had decided that the best means to maximize shareholder value would be to shed non-core businesses and focus on its core business line in its core markets.  We increased our holdings in ACAP, and we announced that

On June 30, 2003, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in FPIC Insurance Group, Inc. ("FPIC").  On August 12, 2003, Florida's insurance department approved our request to hold more than 5% of FPIC's shares, to solicit proxies to hold board seats, and to exercise shareholder rights.  On November 10, 2003, FPIC invited our nominee, John G. Rich, Esq., to join the board and we signed a confidentiality agreement.  On June 7, 2004, we disclosed that because FPIC's management had taken steps to increase its market price to more adequately reflect its value, we sold our shares on the open market, decreasing our holdings below five percent.

On March 29, 2004, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Community Bancshares, Inc. ("COMB").  We disclosed our intention to meet with COMB's management and evaluate management's progress in resolving its regulatory issues, lawsuits, problem loans, and non-performing assets, and that we would likely support management if it effectively addressed COMB's challenges.  On November 21, 2005, we amended our Schedule 13D and stated that although we believed that COMB's management had made good progress, COMB's return on equity would likely remain below average for the foreseeable future, and it should therefore be sold.  On November 21, 2005, we also stated that if COMB did not announce a sale before our deadline to solicit proxies for the next annual meeting, we would solicit proxies to elect our own slate.  On January 6, 2006, we disclosed the names of our three board nominees.  On May 1, 2006, COMB announced its sale to The Banc Corporation, and we sold our shares on the open market.

On June 20, 2005, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Prudential Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania ("PBIP").  Most of PBIP's shares are held by the Prudential Mutual Holding Company (the "MHC"), which is controlled by PBIP's board, similar to the Issuer.  The MHC controls most corporate decisions coming up for a shareholder vote, such as the election of directors.  But regulations promulgated by the FDIC previously barred the MHC from voting on PBIP's management stock benefit plans, and PBIP's IPO prospectus indicated that the MHC would not vote on the plans.  We announced in August 2005 that we would solicit proxies to oppose adoption of the plans as a referendum to place Mr. Stilwell on the board.  PBIP decided not to put the plans up for a vote at the 2006 annual meeting. 

In December 2005, we solicited proxies to withhold votes on the election of directors as a referendum to place Mr. Stilwell on the board.  At the 2006 annual meeting, 71% of PBIP's voting public shares were withheld from voting on management's nominees.

On April 6, 2006, PBIP announced that just after we had filed our Schedule 13D, it had secretly solicited a letter from an FDIC staffer (which it concealed from the public) that the MHC would be allowed to vote in favor of the plans.  PBIP also announced a special meeting to vote on the plans.  We alerted the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "Fed") about this announcement, and PBIP was directed to seek Fed approval before adopting the plans.  On April 19, 2006, PBIP postponed the special meeting.  The Fed subsequently followed the

In December 2007, we filed proxy materials for the solicitation of proxies to withhold votes on the election of PBIP's directors at the 2008 annual meeting of shareholders.  At the February 4, 2008 annual meeting, an average of 77% of PBIP's voting public shares withheld their votes.  Excluding shares held in PBIP's ESOP, an average of 88% of the voting public shares withheld their votes in this election.

On October 4, 2006, we sued PBIP, the MHC, and the directors of PBIP and the MHC in federal court in Philadelphia seeking an order to prevent the MHC from voting in favor of the plans.  On August 15, 2007, the court dismissed some claims, but sustained our cause of action against the MHC as majority shareholder of PBIP for breach of fiduciary duties.  Discovery proceeded and all the directors were deposed.  Both sides moved for summary judgment, but the court ordered the case to trial which was scheduled for June 2008.  On May 22, 2008, we voluntarily discontinued the lawsuit after determining that it would be more effective and appropriate to pursue the directors on a personal basis in a derivative action in accordance with the demand described below.  On June 11, 2008, we filed a notice to appeal certain portions of the lower court's August 15, 2007 order dismissing portions of the lawsuit.

We entered into a settlement agreement and an expense agreement with PBIP in November 2008 under which we agreed to support PBIP's stock benefit plans, drop our litigation and withdraw our shareholder demand, and generally support management, and, in exchange, PBIP agreed, subject to certain conditions, to repurchase up to 3 million of its shares (including shares previously purchased), reimburse a portion of our expenses, and either adopt a second step conversion or add our nominee who meets certain qualification requirements to its board if the repurchases were not completed by a specified time.

On March 5, 2010, we reported that our ownership in PBIP had dropped below 5 percent as a result of open market sales and sales of common stock to PBIP.

On January 19, 2006, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in SCPIE Holdings Inc. ("SKP").  We announced we would run our slate of directors at the 2006 annual meeting and demanded SKP's shareholder list.  SKP initially refused to timely produce the list, but did so after we sued it in Delaware Chancery Court.  We engaged in a proxy contest at the 2006 annual meeting, but SKP's directors were elected.  On December 14, 2006, SKP agreed to place Mr. Stilwell on the board.  On October 16, 2007, Mr. Stilwell resigned from SKP's board after it approved a sale of SKP that Mr. Stilwell believed was an inferior offer.  We solicited shareholder proxies in opposition to the proposed sale; however, the sale was approved.

On July 27, 2006, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Roma Financial Corp. ("ROMA").  Nearly 70% of ROMA's shares are held by a mutual holding company (like the Issuer and PBIP) controlled by ROMA's board.  In April 2007, we engaged in a proxy

On May 23, 2008, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in William Penn Bancorp, Inc. ("WMPN").  A majority of WMPN's shares are held by a mutual holding company (like the Issuer, PBIP, and ROMA) controlled by WMPN's board.  We hope to work with management in maximizing shareholder value.  On June 26, 2008, we provided a PowerPoint presentation to management regarding our views on capital allocation guidelines.

On May 30, 2008, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Malvern Federal Bancorp, Inc. ("MLVF").  A majority of MLVF's shares are held by a mutual holding company (like the Issuer, PBIP, ROMA, and WMPN) controlled by MLVF's board.  We hope to work with management in maximizing shareholder value.  On June 26, 2008, we provided a PowerPoint presentation to management regarding our views on capital allocation guidelines.  In May and June, 2010, we mailed two letters to MLVF's shareholders expressing our dissatisfaction with the company's management.

On November 7, 2008, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Kingsway Financial Services Inc. ("KFS").  We requested a meeting with its CEO and chairman to discuss ways to maximize shareholder value and minimize both operational and balance sheet risks, but the CEO was unresponsive.  We then requisitioned a special shareholders meeting to remove the CEO and chairman from the KFS board and replace them with our two nominees.  On January 7, 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with KFS whereby, among other things, the CEO resigned from the KFS board and KFS expanded its board from nine to ten seats and appointed our nominees to fill the two vacant seats on the board.  On April 23, 2009, Joseph Stilwell was appointed to the KFS board to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of one of our nominees, Larry G. Swets, Jr., and our other nominee, Spencer L. Schneider, was appointed as chairman of the board.  On May 27, 2010, Mr. Stilwell and Mr. Schneider were re-elected to the board.

On December 29, 2008, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in First Savings Financial Group, Inc. ("FSFG").  We met with management in New York.  FSFG announced a stock repurchase plan and began repurchasing its shares.  In December 2009, we reported that our beneficial ownership in the outstanding FSFG common stock had fallen below 5 percent.

On March 12, 2009, we filed a Schedule 13D reporting a position in Alliance Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania ("ALLB").  A majority of ALLB's shares are held by a mutual holding company (like the Issuer, PBIP, ROMA, WMPN, and MLVF) controlled by ALLB's board.  We hope to work with management in maximizing shareholder value.

Members of the Group may seek to make additional purchases or sales of shares of Common Stock. Except as noted in this filing, no member of the Group has any plans or

Item 5.  Interest in Securities of the Issuer

The percentages used in this filing are calculated based on the number of shares of Common Stock, 13,225,000, reported as the number of outstanding shares as of May 14, 2010, in the Issuer's quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 14, 2010.

(A)       Stilwell Value Partners IV

            (a)        Aggregate number of shares beneficially owned:  1,092,300

                        Percentage:  8.3%

            (b)        1.  Sole power to vote or to direct vote:  0

                        2.  Shared power to vote or to direct vote:  1,092,300

                        3.  Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition:  0

                        4.  Shared power to dispose or to direct disposition:  1,092,300

            (c)        Stilwell Value Partners IV has not purchased or sold any shares of Common Stock since the filing of the First Amendment.

            (d)        Because he is the managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC, which is the general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV, Joseph Stilwell has the power to direct the affairs of Stilwell Value Partners IV, including the voting and disposition of shares of Common Stock held in the name of Stilwell Value Partners IV.  Therefore, Joseph Stilwell is deemed to share voting and disposition power with Stilwell Value Partners IV with regard to those shares of Common Stock.

(B)       Stilwell Associates

            (a)        Aggregate number of shares beneficially owned:  1,092,300

                        Percentage:  8.3%

            (b)        1.  Sole power to vote or to direct vote:  0

                        2.  Shared power to vote or to direct vote:  1,092,300

                        3.  Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition:  0

                        4.  Shared power to dispose or to direct disposition:  1,092,300

            (c)        Since the filing of the First Amendment, Stilwell Associates purchased 10,000 shares of Common Stock on June 28, 2010, at a price of $5.03 per share, or a total of $50,300.

            (d)        Because he is the managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC, which is the general partner of Stilwell Associates, Joseph Stilwell has the power to direct the affairs of Stilwell Associates, including the voting and disposition of shares of Common Stock held in the name of Stilwell Associates.  Therefore, Joseph Stilwell is deemed to share voting and disposition power with Stilwell Associates with regard to those shares of Common Stock.

(C)       Stilwell Partners

            (a)        Aggregate number of shares beneficially owned:  1,092,300

                        Percentage:  8.3%

            (b)        1.  Sole power to vote or to direct vote:  0

                        2.  Shared power to vote or to direct vote:  1,092,300

                        3.  Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition:  0

                        4.  Shared power to dispose or to direct disposition:  1,092,300

            (c)        Stilwell Partners has not purchased or sold any shares of Common Stock since the filing of the First Amendment.

            (d)        Because he is the general partner of Stilwell Partners, Joseph Stilwell has the power to direct the affairs of Stilwell Partners, including the voting and disposition of shares of Common Stock held in the name of Stilwell Partners.  Therefore, Joseph Stilwell is deemed to share voting and disposition power with Stilwell Partners with regard to those shares of Common Stock.

(D)       Stilwell Value LLC

       (a)        Aggregate number of shares beneficially owned:  1,092,300

                   Percentage:  8.3%

       (b)        1.  Sole power to vote or to direct vote:  0

                   2.  Shared power to vote or to direct vote:  1,092,300

                        3.  Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition:  0

                        4.  Shared power to dispose or to direct disposition:  1,092,300

            (c)        Stilwell Value LLC has made no purchases of shares of Common Stock.

            (d)        Because he is the managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC, Joseph Stilwell has the power to direct the affairs of Stilwell Value LLC.  Stilwell Value LLC is the general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV and Stilwell Associates.  Therefore, Stilwell Value LLC may be deemed to share with Joseph Stilwell voting and disposition power with regard to the shares of Common Stock held by Stilwell Value Partners IV and Stilwell Associates.

(E)       Joseph Stilwell

            (a)        Aggregate number of shares beneficially owned:  1,092,300

                        Percentage:  8.3%

            (b)        1.  Sole power to vote or to direct vote:  0

              2.  Shared power to vote or to direct vote:  1,092,300

            3.  Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition:  0

            4.  Shared power to dispose or to direct disposition:  1,092,300

            (c)        Joseph Stilwell has not purchased or sold any shares of Common Stock since the filing of the First Amendment.

Item 6.  Contracts,  Arrangements,  Understandings  or  Relationships  With Respect to Securities of the Issuer

Other than the Amended Joint Filing Agreement filed as Exhibit 2 to the First Amendment, there are no contracts, arrangements, understandings or relationships among the persons named in Item 2 hereof and between such persons and any person with respect to any securities of the Issuer, including but not limited to transfer or voting of any of the securities, finders' fees, joint ventures, loan or option arrangements, puts or calls, guarantees of profits, divisions of profits or losses, or the giving or withholding of proxies, except for sharing of profits.  Stilwell Value LLC, in its capacity as general partner of Stilwell Value Partners IV and Stilwell Associates, and Joseph Stilwell, in his capacities as general partner of Stilwell Partners and managing and sole member of Stilwell Value LLC, are entitled to an allocation of a portion of profits.

See Items 1 and 2 above regarding disclosure of the relationships between members of the Group, which disclosure is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 7.  Material to be Filed as Exhibits

SIGNATURES

After reasonable inquiry and to the best of our knowledge and belief, we certify that the information set forth in this statement is true, complete and correct.

Date:    July 26, 2010

EXHIBIT 3

Stilwell Value Partners IV Complaint Against NorthEast Community Bancorp, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Plaintiff, Stilwell Value Partners IV, L.P., by its attorney, Spencer L. Schneider, Esq., complains of defendant as follows:

Parties

1.      Plaintiff Stilwell Value Partners IV, L.P. (“Stilwell”) is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of business at 111 Broadway, New York, NY 10004.

2.      Defendant Northeast Community Bancorp, Inc. (“NECB”) is a federal stock association whose main office is located at 325 Hamilton Avenue, New York, NY 10601.

Jurisdiction and Venue

3.      Subject matter jurisdiction exists under 28 USC §1331 because the controversy between the parties arises under federal law.

4.      Venue exists under 28 USC §1391 because defendant resides in this district.

Facts

5.      NECB’s shares are publicly traded on the Nasdaq exchange.

6.      At all relevant times, Stilwell beneficially holds 697,159 shares of voting

7.      The record holder of Stilwell’s NECB shares is Cede & Co. (“Cede”). Cede is a division of Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation which provides post-trade custody, settlement, and clearinghouse services for 3.5 million securities world-wide, the world’s largest clearinghouse. The majority of shares owned by individuals and institutions on United States stock exchanges are held beneficially with Cede as the record holder. The purpose of this system is to streamline trades and eliminate the physical handling of stock certificates; the beneficial holder of shares possesses the economic benefits and voting rights of the shares, Cede (the record holder) being the owner in name only.

8.      Under 12 C.F.R. § 552.11(b)(2), any stockholder of a Federal stock association holding of record more than 5% of its total outstanding voting shares may examine and make extracts of the association’s record of stockholders.

9.      Section 552.11(c) further provides:

The right to examination authorized by paragraph (b) of this section and the right to inspect the list of stockholders provided by a Federal stock association’s bylaws may be denied to any stockholder or group of stockholders upon the refusal of any such stockholder or group of stockholders to furnish such association, its transfer agent or registrar an affidavit that such examination or inspection is not desired for any purpose which is in the interest of a business or object other than the business of the association, that such stockholder has not within the five years preceding the date of the affidavit sold or offered for sale, and does not now intend to sell or offer for sale, any list of stockholders of the association or of any other corporation, and that such stockholder has not within said five-year period aided or abetted any other person in procuring any list of stockholders for purposes of selling or offering for sale such list.

10.  On or about June 28, 2010, at Stilwell’s request, Cede executed a “request for record of stockholders” under 12 C.F.R. § 552.11(b)(2) requesting that NECB grant Stilwell’s counsel access to examine NECB’s record of stockholders by no later than July 14, 2010. A copy of the request for record of stockholders is attached as Ex. A.

11.        Cede’s request for record of stockholders further stated that the purpose of the request is to enable Stilwell to “communicate with other stockholders of the Company and to solicit proxies from other stockholders of the Company.” It further stated that Cede was furnishing this demand as the stockholder of record . . . on behalf of the Stilwell Group” and that it “has no interest in this matter other than to take those steps which are necessary to ensure that the Stilwell Group is not denied its rights as the beneficial owner of shares of Common Stock”.

12.        On July 1, 2010, the request for record of stockholders was delivered to NECB.

13.        On July 13, 2010, counsel for NECB notified Stilwell that it was refusing production of the record of stockholders unless both Stilwell and Cede provided Section 552.11(c) affidavits. Counsel cited and attached a 1991 letter from a Chief Counsel of the Office of Thrift Supervision which purportedly opined that the Section 552.11(c) affidavit be provided by at least the stockholder of record. Copies of counsel’s email and the OTS letter are attached as Ex. B.

14.        On July 19, 2010, counsel for Stilwell emailed to NECB’s counsel Stilwell’s Section 552.11(c) affidavit and a power of attorney granting Stilwell’s  counsel authority to examine the record of stockholders on Stilwell’s behalf. The email explained that a Section 552.11(c) affidavit was not required from Cede inasmuch as Cede was not planning to examine, make extracts of, or otherwise possess the stockholder records. Copies of this email, the power of attorney, and the affidavit are attached as Ex. C.

15.        Later on July 19, 2010, NECB’s counsel responded to Stilwell’s counsel demanding that not only Cede provide a Section 552.11(c) affidavit, but that Stilwell’s counsel also provide a Section 552.11(c) affidavit. A copy of this email is attached as Ex. D.

16.        NECB continues to refuse to provide Stilwell with access to its record of stockholders.

First Cause Of Action

17.        Plaintiff incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in the paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.

18.     Under 12 C.F.R. § 552.11, Stilwell is afforded a right to examine and copy NECB’s record of stockholders.

19.     Stilwell complied with all respects of 12 C.F.R. § 552.11.

20.     NECB failed to comply with 12 C.F.R. § 552.11.

21.     An actual controversy exists between the parties within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2201.

22.     Plaintiff requests that the Court declare the rights of the parties with respect to this controversy and order NECB to provide plaintiff with access to examine and copy its record of stockholders.

Second Cause Of Action

23.        Plaintiff incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in the paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.

24.     Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for defendant’s refusal to provide access to examine and copy its record of stockholders.

25.     Plaintiff has been irreparably harmed as a result defendant’s refusal to provide access to examine and copy its record of stockholders.

26.     Plaintiff is entitled to an injunction compelling defendant to provide access to examine and copy its record of stockholders.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands, against defendant, a judgment declaring that plaintiff is entitled to have access to inspect the record of stockholders and an injunction compelling defendant to provide access to plaintiff to examine and copy the record of stockholders, and for such other and different relief as may be just.

Dated:        New York, New York
                  July 21, 2010