Richmond Billed Over $100,000 MORE in April & May by Private Law Firm in FOIA Whistleblower Case
Bills continue to mount as Richmond farms out FOIA whistleblower case to multinational law firm Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
Just last month, I reported that multinational law firm Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. had billed Richmond over $130,000 so far for legal services in the case Clay v. City of Richmond et al. The case concerns the City of Richmond’s former FOIA Officer, Connie Clay, who filed a whistleblower complaint seeking $250,000 in damages for alleged wrongful discrimination, retaliation, and discharge.
The final invoice in that article was dated March 20, 2025.
So, two days ago, I sent a FOIA request to the Richmond City Attorney’s Office requesting:
…any invoices and billing statements from Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. concerning the case Clay v. City of Richmond et al. Please truncate my request to records between March 21, 2025 and now.
Yesterday, June 25, 2025, Assistant City Attorney John K. Dickinson responded in part:
You have requested “any invoices and billing statements from Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. concerning the case Clay v. City of Richmond et al.,” dated between March 21, 2025, and the present. I have attached two summary invoices dated April 30, 2025, and May 31, 2025, to this email. The firm’s bank account numbers and associated routing information have been redacted pursuant to Va. Code § 2.2-3705.1(13).
Additionally, there are two detailed invoices containing descriptions of the specific legal services provided during each billing period which are responsive to your request. Please be advised, however, that these records are exempt from disclosure under Va. Code § 2.2-3705.1(2) as information protected by the attorney-client privilege, and therefore will not be released.
While I appreciate the two summary invoices, note that when I requested private law firm invoices concerning my own FOIA case in Portsmouth Circuit Court this year, the Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office provided detailed invoices with select redactions.
Note further that requesters under Virginia FOIA have a “right of redaction” according to the Supreme Court of Virginia in Hawkins v. Town of South Hill, 301 Va. 416, 428 (2022) such that material exempt from disclosure under the law must be selectively redacted — the entire record cannot instead be withheld in its entirety. I’ve therefore asked Mr. Dickinson to provide some authority justifying the Richmond City Attorney’s Office’s complete withholding of the detailed invoices in this case.
As you can see in the invoices below, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. billed $64,056.29 for services rendered through March 31, 2025. The final invoice in my original article covered services rendered through February 28, 2025, suggesting this new bill only covers the month of March.
The firm also billed $36,122.62 for services rendered through April 30, 2025.
If you combine these two bills with the over $130,000 detailed in my original article, Richmond is set to pay out over $230,000 in legal fees for a case that hasn’t even reached the trial phase yet, a case in which Clay originally sought $250,000 in damages.
I’m not a lawyer, but my understanding is that if Clay were to prevail in this case, the City could be on the hook not only for Clay’s damages, but also for her attorney’s fees — in addition to whatever the City’s private legal team ultimately charges.
You can download the two summary invoices here:
