A Richmond judge didn’t take long to decide that she won’t back down from her public criticism of a lawyer who has been representing the city government in her courtroom.

In an order Wednesday, Circuit Court Judge Claire G. Cardwell denied a request to either retract or revise a comment in a recent court order in which she faulted the city’s lawyer for an “apparent lack of candor.”

Ogletree Deakins attorney Jimmy F. Robinson Jr. is defending the city in the lawsuit filed by former City Hall Freedom of Information Act officer Connie Clay, who claims she was wrongfully fired for pointing out the city’s failures to comply with Virginia’s public records laws.

In FOIA officer case, city’s lawyer fires back at judge for questioning his ‘candor’

Robinson seemed to acknowledge he and the city were taking an extraordinary step by floating the possibility that the judge should step back from the case.

The RichmonderGraham Moomaw

The two-year-old legal battle has been unusually intense.  Robinson and Clay’s lead attorney, Sarah Robb, have routinely accused each other of saying things that aren’t true. The judge has been stuck in the middle, often having to resolve wildly different explanations about what’s causing problems and delays with the case.

In her response to Robinson’s complaint, Cardwell said she is not conducting an “ethical proceeding” against him, while issuing a reminder she has the power to punish lawyers for what they do in her court.

“While the Court may suspend or revoke an attorney's privilege to appear before it, issues involving an attorney’s ethical conduct pursuant to the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct, are outside the subject matter jurisdiction of circuit courts,” Cardwell wrote. “Ethical proceedings involving attorney conduct are within the sole purview of the Virginia State Bar.”

The order explaining legal ethics procedures is the latest sign of the unusually fraught territory the case has veered into after officials hired a private law firm that has billed the city nearly $700,000 for its work so far.

With new batch of invoices, city’s costs for FOIA officer lawsuit rise to $633K

A city spokesperson declined to comment on why a large batch of invoices came in just as 2025 ended.

The RichmonderGraham Moomaw

In a previous ruling related to a fight over logistics for a court-ordered settlement meeting, Cardwell included a footnote saying she was concerned some of Robinson’s statements to the court were at odds with what she determined to be the truth.

Robinson had said the city was cleared to show up to the settlement meeting an hour later than planned with City Hall’s designated representative, Chief Administrative Officer Odie Donald II, available by phone but not participating directly in the talks. The judge ruled that — contrary to Robinson’s remarks — the city was not authorized to deviate from the court’s orders, which set a particular time for the meeting and said a city representative must attend. Cardwell ordered a second settlement meeting, with a clear instruction that both sides should show up in person and on time.

Robinson insists he did not make any knowingly false statements and the disconnect was only a matter of differing memories and interpretations of things that were said.

He took exception to the judge’s remark questioning his candor, filing a motion on the city’s behalf asking Cardwell to essentially take back a comment he saw as unfair and unwarranted. Robinson also argued the judge’s actions have created a strong enough appearance of unfairness that Cardwell should consider recusing herself from the case.

Just a few days after that request, Cardwell fully rejected it, saying she would not be revising her order that questioned Robinson’s candor.

In her own filing responding to Robinson’s claims about the judge, Robb argued Cardwell was within her rights to criticize Robinson for alleged “misconduct” that occurred in full view of the court. Reconsidering or walking back the comment about what had happened, Robb wrote, would be condoning it.

“Not holding Ogletree Deakins accountable would result in other defense counsel adopting Ogletree Deakins' behavior of obfuscating, stonewalling, and dissembling at great cost to the judicial system, to other litigants, and to the clients of the law firms that engage in such behavior — exactly what happened in this case,” Robb wrote, adding “enough is enough.”

Robb also questioned whether Robinson’s pushback against the judge was being done to protect the city’s interests or Robinson’s own reputation as a lawyer.

Robb wrote that Robinson’s latest court filing “focuses solely on his own agenda — not his clients’ case.”

Mayor Danny Avula’s office has largely declined to comment on the Clay case. City officials did not respond to questions about how the mayor is keeping tabs on the legal developments and whether he agrees with what’s being filed on the city’s behalf.

Judge will review accuracy of travel receipts city provided

While Robinson was attempting to reopen a previous disagreement about whether the court can trust the city and its representatives to tell the truth, a new battle seemed to be emerging over the accuracy of travel receipts filed by the city’s team.

The judge has faulted Clay’s attorneys for unilaterally cancelling a court-ordered deposition last year involving former city spokeswoman Petula Burks, who was Clay’s boss in City Hall’s communications office. Because Clay’s team was at fault for trying to cancel the deposition at the last minute, the court ordered Clay’s attorneys to reimburse any travel expenses Burks had to cover in order to travel to Richmond for a deposition that didn’t occur.

After Robb cast doubt on the accuracy of the receipts Robinson filed to show how much the trip had cost Burks, the judge suspended a deadline she had given for Robb to pay and ordered the city’s lawyers to file a response by April 1 ahead of a full hearing on the matter.

In addition to questioning the $966 cost, Robb has raised concerns that some of the details on the receipts don’t align with how Robinson has previously described the deposition-related travel for Burks.

For example, the receipts indicate a plane ticket for Burks was purchased after Robb said she was cancelling the deposition. At the time, Robinson was arguing the deposition shouldn’t be cancelled because Burks had already made travel arrangements.

Burks dropped from case

It’s still possible the two sides could settle the lawsuit before a trial scheduled to happen in June.

It’s unclear what the chances of a settlement are given the lingering hostilities, but Clay’s attorneys moved this week to ease one aspect of the case.

The original suit named both the city and Burks as defendants, but newly filed court paperwork shows Clay’s attorneys are dropping Burks from the case.

Burks is no longer a city employee. As a private individual, she would presumably have less ability to pay the type of damages Clay is seeking from the city, which remains a defendant in the case.

Robb declined to comment on why Burks is being dropped as a defendant.

Contact Reporter Graham Moomaw at gmoomaw@richmonder.org