Quantcast

Judge orders extended hearing in whistleblower case against Richmond

George Copeland Jr. | 5/1/2025, 6 p.m.
A Richmond judge has set a May 27 hearing to resolve ongoing discovery disputes in a $250,000 whistleblower lawsuit filed …
Connie Clay

A Richmond judge has set a May 27 hearing to resolve ongoing discovery disputes in a $250,000 whistleblower lawsuit filed by a former public information manager who says she was fired for refusing to violate state transparency laws.

Attorneys for the City of Richmond and plaintiff Connie Clay are expected to spend several hours discussing motions related to protective orders, subpoenas, depositions and access to Clay’s medical record. Thehearing, initially expected to last an hour when discussions began Tuesday morning, is now scheduled to run from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Richmond Circuit Court.

Tuesday’s hearing was the latest development in the suit since a motion to dismiss Clay’s suit was dismissed by Judge Claire Cardwell in early February.

Clay, who previously served as the city’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) officer, alleges she was terminated in January 2023 in retaliation for reporting and refusing to participate in what she describes as illegal and unethical handling of FOIA requests. Her lawsuit names the city and former spokesperson Petula Burks, claiming they enabled a “chaotic and mismanaged” records process that violated Virginia law.

She further alleges city officials interfered in FOIA responses and disregarded her warnings. During her time in the role, Clay says she was sued twice over public records requests.

While the May 27 hearing was set to last only an hour, discussion between the attorneys and judge brought up other concerns that would take longer to address, extending the length of the future discussion over the course of an otherwise short hearing.

Concerns from both legal teams about challenges in communication and resolving issues outside of court at times led to tense exchanges, prompting Cardwell to again urge the attorneys to address their disagreements more cooperatively.

“I understand strong advocacy,” Cardwell said. “I would besiege counsel on both sides to start anew.”

Attorneys for both sides also are scheduled to confer by phone 11 a.m. Monday to address pending issues.