In a recent development, Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr has requested that a Philadelphia judge dismiss a legal malpractice lawsuit brought against the firm by former Conrail CEO David LeVan. This request follows a federal court decision upholding an $11 million arbitration award against LeVan, related to his involvement in a failed casino project in Gettysburg.
The dispute traces back to the aftermath of the failed venture, where LeVan accused the law firm of providing inadequate legal advice, which allegedly contributed to the financial fallout he experienced. Saul Ewing, however, contends that LeVan’s malpractice claims are no longer viable due to being time-barred by the statute of limitations. The firm maintains that the applicable time frame for bringing a malpractice suit has elapsed, making the current claims invalid.
The case’s origins lie in the ambitious attempt to develop a casino near the historic Gettysburg battlefield, a proposal that faced significant local opposition and regulatory hurdles. The project’s collapse left LeVan facing substantial financial liabilities, leading to the arbitration award in favor of the opposing parties.
Legal observers note that the outcome of Saul Ewing’s request could have substantial implications for the firm and LeVan. The case has garnered attention given the high profile of the parties involved and the substantial amount at stake. It also raises important questions about the responsibilities of legal advisors and the remedies available to clients claiming inadequate counsel.
This ongoing legal battle continues to unfold in the Philadelphia court system.