Centre County judge to rule in Slusser suit

WILKES-BARRE – A Centre County judge said he will rule by early next week on whether to allow the plaintiffs in a legal malpractice case to collect on a multimillion-dollar judgment they were awarded, or require them to wait until a secondary issue connected to the suit is resolved.

Senior Judge Charles C. Brown Jr. was assigned to hear post-trial motions, including one alleging Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella was biased, in the suit the estate of Thomas Slusser filed against the Hazleton law firm of Laputka, Bayless, Ecker and Cohn.

Brown held a hearing Friday, but the proceeding did not address the bias allegations against Ciavarella. Rather it focused on attempts by the Laputka firm to overturn a June 16 order that would allow the Slusser family to begin efforts to collect the award.

A Luzerne County jury in February awarded the Slussers $3.4 million, finding the Laputka firm was negligent in handling several land transactions.

Attorneys for Laputka filed a motion seeking to overturn the verdict, citing numerous legal errors they allege Ciavarella made during the trial. They also alleged Ciavarella was biased in favor of the Slussers, who were represented by the law firm of Robert J. Powell. Powell was once part owner of a company in which Ciavarella has a financial interest.

Friday’s hearing was dedicated solely to the issue of whether a court action entered on June 16 that allows the Slussers to begin collection efforts is valid.

Jeffrey McCarron, attorney for the Laputka firm, maintains the Slussers cannot collect on the debt until a secondary issue related to the case is resolved. That issue involves a separate claim based on a legal principle known as detrimental reliance – an allegation that a person relied on the advice of another to their detriment.

Ciavarella had ruled prior to trial that the detrimental reliance issue would be tried separately from other claims raised against the Laputka firm. That part of the case has not yet been resolved, however.

Stephen Seach, attorney for the Slussers, argues the secondary legal issue is irrelevant to whether the Slussers can collect on the verdict that was already entered.

“The defendants are saying the plaintiffs would have to win two times before collecting one time,” Seach said in court papers.

Brown said Friday he needed more time to review the case and would rule by July 16. Other post-trial motions, including the allegations of bias against Ciavarella, may be heard at a later hearing.