Skip to Content

Walter Weir

WEIR LLP Names Jeff Cianciulli Managing Partner; Walter Weir Jr. to Continue as Chairman and Founding Partner

WEIR LLP has announced that Jeff Cianciulli will become the firm’s Managing Partner. Walter Weir Jr., the firm’s founder and named partner, will continue serving the firm as Chairman and Founding Partner.

The leadership transition reflects the firm’s commitment to continuity, client service and long-term growth. As Managing Partner, Cianciulli will guide the firm’s strategic direction and oversee its operations while continuing to represent clients in complex commercial, bankruptcy and transactional matters. In his continuing leadership role, Weir will provide counsel on the firm’s direction and remain engaged in the practice he established.

“Jeff has earned the trust of our clients and colleagues through his sound judgment, practical approach and commitment to the firm,” said Weir. “I am confident that he will lead Weir LLP with the same dedication to excellence and client service that has defined the firm since its founding. I look forward to supporting him and the firm in my continuing role as Chairman and Founding Partner.”

“It is an honor to serve as Managing Partner of WEIR LLP,” said Cianciulli. “Walter built a firm known for sophisticated legal counsel, determined advocacy and enduring client relationships. I look forward to working with him and our colleagues to build on that foundation and position the firm for continued success.”

Cianciulli represents financial institutions, corporations, trustees and individuals in complex commercial disputes, bankruptcy proceedings, corporate restructurings, workouts, and commercial loan and real estate transactions. Licensed in Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey, he has served as lead counsel in trials and evidentiary hearings in state and federal courts, including proceedings before the Delaware Court of Chancery.

He also advises businesses on risk management and day-to-day legal and operational matters.

Weir founded the firm and has practiced for more than 44 years, representing businesses, financial institutions, lenders, creditors and other clients in complex business, banking and commercial law matters. His work spans commercial litigation, bankruptcy, creditor-debtor rights, insolvency and reorganization, including trials and appeals in state and federal courts. He holds nine bar admissions, including admission to the United States Supreme Court.

Weir LLP Secures Significant RICO Dismissal for Builders Capital in $86 Million Dispute

Walter Weir, Jr., Esquire, represented Builders Capital and related defendants in a high-stakes federal lawsuit involving approximately $86 million in disputed claims arising from construction financing for several Philadelphia-area real estate developments. The plaintiffs alleged that lending and loan-servicing decisions constituted a fraudulent “loan-to-own” scheme, asserting civil RICO, RICO conspiracy, and breach-of-contract claims.

In a favorable ruling issued September 29, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected the plaintiffs’ attempt to transform a commercial lending dispute into a federal racketeering case. The Court held that the alleged conduct sounded in contract—not racketeering—and dismissed both the substantive RICO and RICO conspiracy claims because the plaintiffs failed to plead any qualifying predicate acts with the required specificity. Although the Court permitted a limited breach-of-contract claim to proceed at the pleading stage, its dismissal of the RICO counts eliminated the lawsuit’s most serious allegations and substantially narrowed the case against Builders Capital.

Weir Greenblatt Pierce Team Secures Dismissal of Fraud Action Over Sale of Philmont Country Club

Weir Greenblatt Pierce (WGP) partners, Walter Weir, Jr., Susan Verbonitz and Alan L. Yatvin, recently secured a complete victory for their clients, Concert Golf Partners and its principal, Peter Nanula, in a fraud action brought against them by developer North Penn Towns (NPT), when United States District Court Judge Karen Spencer Marston granted summary judgment in favor of WGP’s clients on all claims.

The action arose from Concert’s purchase of the Philmont Country Club in 2017.  NPT had been a suitor for purchase of a 61-acre portion of the Club’s property for development of residential homes.  The deal fell apart in September of 2016, and Concert, which purchases distressed golf clubs, infuses capital and manages them back to financial viability, ultimately purchased the entire Club.  Concert agreed to pay off the Club’s debts of nearly a million dollars, make a set of specific capital improvements, estimated to cost approximately $4 million dollars, and agreed to make a further capital improvements of about $5 million upon sale of the development parcel.

NPT sued Philmont Country Club, the non-profit that had owned the Club of the same name, Concert, Nanula and others in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas over the sale.  NPT then settled with Philmont, part of which included assignment of Philmont’s non-contractual claims to NPT.  NPT then filed suit in district court against various Concert entities and Ridgewood, a developer working with Concert, alleging violations of federal antitrust law, fraud, breach of contract and conspiracy, On August 12, 2021, Judge Marston dismissed the federal antitrust and conspiracy claims, some of the fraud claims, and claims of aiding and abetting fraud.

NPT then filed an amended complaint asserting fraud, fraudulent nondisclosure, and fraudulent concealment under Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 550 and 551, and aiding and abetting fraud.  The suit asserted that Concert and Nanula never intended to make the agreed capital improvements and that Concert’s collaboration with developer Ridgewood somehow compromised the sale price of the Club.  There was also a breach of contract claim against Ridgewood arising from an alleged breach of a confidentiality agreement.

In her July 28, 2022, Opinion granting summary judgment as to all defendants on all counts, except the breach of contract claim against Ridgewood, Judge Marston agreed with WGP that the fraud claim asserting misrepresentations as to the capital improvements was barred by the gist of the action doctrine, because the allegations of fraud involved duties that were outline in the sales agreement.  Because the action sounded in contract, not tort, the fraud claims were barred. 

NPT’s fraudulent concealment and non-disclosure claims under the Restatement (Second) of Torts related to alleged failure to disclose and actively concealing that Concert and Ridgewood were working together.  Judge Marston dismissed these claims after concluding that Concert and Nanula had no duty to disclose their relationship which was neither material nor basic to the transaction and that Ridgewood was not a party to a business transaction with Philmont.  Finally, because the fraud claims were dismissed as to all defendants, the aiding and abetting fraud claims were also dismissed.

Commenting on the decision, Walter Weir, Jr., said:  “This was an astounding victory for the defendants and represents the best of our judicial system to ferret out and make simple what was an unnecessarily complicated case.”

Read the Full Opinion here: Summary Judgment Memorandum Opinion

Read more about the case in the Legal Intelligencer here: Fraud Claim Over Sale of Philmont Country Club Dismissed

Weir Greenblatt Pierce LLP Secures Summary Judgment For Client In COVID-19 Breach of Contract Case

            Weir Greenblatt Pierce LLP partners Walter Weir, Jr. and Steven E. Angstreich secured a significant victory for their client in an action against a commercial tenant for breach of lease due to the tenant’s failure to pay rent during the COVID-19 pandemic.  In granting summary judgment in favor of their client, the Superior Court of New Jersey rejected the tenant’s argument that the COVID-19 pandemic relieved the tenant of its obligation to pay rent under the doctrines of frustration of purpose and impracticability.

          The action arose from the tenant’s breach of a 10-year commercial lease when it refused to pay rent claiming that the pandemic frustrated its purpose for entering the lease, and that it was unable to perform under the lease terms. The issues in the case involved questions of whether a party may cite the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic to void its obligations under a contract, and whether the contract itself included provisions that would allow a party to do so.

            The tenant, who was a provider of medical services, alleged, among other things, that because the pandemic caused an increase in demand for remote services and a decrease in demand for in-person services, the agreement became less profitable and its primary purpose for entering the agreement had been frustrated. The tenant further alleged that performance became impracticable for the same reason and argued that it should no longer have to pay rent.

            In granting summary judgment, the New Jersey Superior Court found that the lease clearly states that the premises would be used for “medical services” as provided by the tenant and included no language regarding contingencies. The Court also noted that the lease clearly indicated that any failure to pay rent would amount to a material breach of the agreement. The Court ultimately held that although the COVID-19 pandemic was an unforeseeable circumstance, “[n]o rational fact finder could find that the performance here was literally impossible or made inordinately more difficult by COVID-19, as the only performance required by Defendant tenant was to pay their rent.” The change in demand for in-person medical services, according to the Court, did not frustrate any purpose contemplated in the language of the agreement between the Parties, and did not render the tenant unable to perform its obligation to pay rent under the lease. Accordingly, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the landlord.

            The full Opinion may be read here.