THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, March 14, 1995 TAG: 9503140329
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY MARC DAVIS, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: NORFOLK LENGTH: Long : 130 lines
What happens when the 12th-richest landowner in Virginia Beach tries to put the sixth-richest landowner out of business with a massive, $224 million antitrust lawsuit?
You get one of the ugliest cases to hit Norfolk's federal court in years - a case in which the plaintiff was forced to undergo a court-ordered psychiatric exam and turn over nearly every shred of her personal life.
A case in which 150 witnesses were called for a trial that probably would have lasted more than two months.
A case that generated more than 600 pages of legal briefs on one issue alone.
You get the case of Gale M. Levine vs. F. Wayne McLeskey Jr.
On Friday, a federal judge in Norfolk threw out the lawsuit, which accused McLeskey of wrecking Levine's business in a long, malicious campaign to force her into bankruptcy and buy her Marina Shores complex on the cheap.
The judge granted summary judgment for McLeskey, 10 months after the lawsuit was filed.
``It is clear to me,'' Judge Raymond A. Jackson remarked at a January hearing, ``that this is one nasty feud going on here. It appears there has been a limit on nothing, absolutely nothing, in this case.''
The legal battle pitted two wealthy, stubborn, well-known developers and marina owners against each other.
On one side was Gale Levine, the 41-year-old owner of Marina Shores, a ritzy complex of apartments, boat slips and shops on Great Neck Road.
On the other side was Wayne McLeskey, a crusty developer with a knack for finding one controversy after another during the past 25 years.
Neither side lacked cash for the fight. Levine and her husband, David, are worth about $30 million, according to a lawyer in the case. They own $26 million in property, putting them at No. 12 on the Virginia Beach real estate tax list.
McLeskey is No. 6 on the same list, with properties worth $37 million, including apartments, shopping centers and a marina, according to the city assessor.
The two families had a history of bad blood, dating back to 1980, when David Levine sued McLeskey, and others, over who should get sand from the dredging of Lynnhaven Inlet.
The Levines and McLeskey are still competitors. For 13 years, McLeskey owned the only dry-storage marina in the Lynnhaven Inlet area, called Lynnhaven Marine Boatel - until the Levines opened Marina Shores across the street in 1991.
Legal war erupted.
Before the new marina was 2 months old, Levine filed the first lawsuit. She sued the new restaurant at her marina - Hoppers II, half-owned by McLeskey - for improper management. The restaurant sued back.
More lawsuits were filed, back and forth. One resulted in a $1.8 million jury verdict against Levine, but it was reversed on appeal by the state Supreme Court.
Finally, on May 19 last year, Levine upped the stakes: She and Marina Shores filed a 15-count lawsuit against McLeskey. It alleged conspiracy, defamation, antitrust violations, slander of title, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and interference with contract and business expectancy.
Levine accused McLeskey of spreading lies around Virginia Beach to drive away her customers, kill her bank loans and destroy her reputation.
She sought $224.8 million in damages.
McLeskey was stunned. ``It's not too often you get sued for a quarter-billion dollars,'' he said Monday.
Surprisingly, McLeskey did not sue back, as defendants in such lawsuits often do. As a tactical maneuver, it was a good move. It ensured that McLeskey could pry into every aspect of Levine's personal life - her finances, her mental well-being, even her sex life - but Levine could not pry back.
He could do so because Levine accused him of hurting her business and personal reputation, and causing her physical and mental distress.
``By filing such a far-reaching complaint,'' McLeskey's attorney wrote in a legal brief, ``plaintiffs put at issue every aspect of their personal, professional and business relationships and finances. . .
``Defendant (McLeskey) did not choose to put his personal and professional life on the line. Rather, plaintiffs brought this lawsuit and, by so doing, opened themselves up to a detailed examination.''
McLeskey went after Levine with a vengeance.
He asked the judge to order a mental examination of Levine - and got it. He asked for Levine's personal family photos, to show she was not as shattered as she claimed - and got it. He asked for 10 years of financial records - and got it.
He asked that Levine's husband, David, be ordered to testify on every aspect of their life, but on this point McLeskey lost. The judge agreed that, at age 76, David Levine might not survive the stress of deposition.
But the most lurid, potentially damaging evidence never came out in public. It is filed, under court seal, under the general heading of ``Evidence of drug use at Marina Shores and immoral conduct by Gale M. Levine.''
It remains a mystery. Neither side would comment on it Monday.
McLeskey's lawyers say such prying was justified. ``There was no aspect of the Levines' personal or business lives that they didn't blame on McLeskey,'' lawyer Walter D. Kelley Jr. said Monday.
Levine's attorney would not comment on how the case was conducted.
Money-wise, McLeskey wanted to prove that Marina Shores was a financial mess, even though it was filled with boats and apartment renters.
In his ruling Friday, the judge acknowledged this fact. He said McLeskey had not defamed Marina Shores by telling people it was bankrupt.
``The evidence in this case,'' Jackson wrote, ``is that Marina Shores has never been able to pay its debts as they become due . . . Both parties agree that Marina Shores was losing money, that Levine was not paying her note to Signet (Bank) as it came due, and that at one time she considered filing bankruptcy for Marina Shores. Therefore, a description of Marina Shores (by McLeskey) as bankrupt was not a false statement . . . ''
Jackson also ruled that while McLeskey may have been a pain-in-the-neck - making nasty cracks about Levine at the marina restaurant, spreading rumors about her sexual orientation - this was not ``so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree'' as to constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Levine claimed that she lost at least 25 pounds, cried a lot, and seriously considered suicide because of McLeskey's attacks on her.
But, the judge ruled, these symptoms ``do not qualify as the type of emotional distress that will state a cause of action in Virginia.''
On Monday, McLeskey said he will not try to force Levine to pay his legal expenses. ``As far as I'm concerned, it's the end of the line. I want to get back to living my life and running my business,'' he said.
But Levine's lawyer, Lawrence, said, ``It's not over. We have the right to appeal it . . . We probably will.'' ILLUSTRATION: Photos
Gale M. Levine, above, accused F. Wayne McLeskey Jr., below, of
spreading lies around Virginia Beach to ruin her business and
destroy her reputation. A judge disagreed, throwing out the $224.8
million lawsuit.
KEYWORDS: LAWSUITS by CNB