A whistleblower lawsuit brought by Richmond’s former public records official against the city and its former communications chief can go to trial, a judge ruled Wednesday. 

Richmond Circuit Court Judge Claire Cardwell’s Feb. 5 ruling rejected arguments made by the city’s attorneys that the case shouldn’t move forward because ex-Freedom of Information Act officer Connie Clay hadn’t sufficiently proved she met the state’s legal requirements to bring a whistleblower suit.

The law “only requires a plaintiff to allege a disclosure of suspected wrongdoing or abuse,” wrote Cardwell before concluding that Clay had done so.

Clay, who filed her suit against Richmond and former city spokeswoman Petula Burks in March 2024, has claimed she was wrongfully fired for repeatedly flagging cases in which the city violated the state’s FOIA law, which outlines what documents must be made available to the public and specific instances in which they can be withheld. 

The city in turn has contended that it let Clay go in January 2024 because she wasn’t a “good fit” for the job, not because of the concerns she raised over FOIA. 

A trial has been scheduled for September 2025, but ahead of that date, attorneys for Richmond and Burks have sought to have the case dismissed on the grounds that Clay hadn’t met all the criteria laid out in Virginia’s Fraud and Abuse Whistle Blower Protection Act to bring a complaint under that law. 

In particular, W. Ryan Waddell, one of four attorneys from Ogletree Deakins whom Richmond has hired to fight Clay’s case, argued in a January hearing that Clay hadn’t presented enough evidence to show the city had committed “wrongdoing or abuse” serious enough to trigger whistleblower protections. 

“There’s nothing in there that shows anything more than a mere technical violation,” he told Cardwell, characterizing the disagreements over releasing public records as routine debates over whether certain exemptions in Virginia’s FOIA law should apply to specific requests. 

But Clay’s attorney, Sarah Robb, disputed that conclusion, saying the violations Clay is claiming included no “back-and-forth” about whether exemptions should apply and show that “time and time again, there’s this pattern of blanket exceptions” being applied by the city to justify withholding public records on major issues such as inaccurate meals tax bills and employee overtime payments. 

“These are not technical violations,” said Robb. 

In addition, she pointed to two lawsuits brought against the city and Clay during Clay’s time as Richmond’s FOIA officer over the city’s refusal to provide requested documents. Both of those lawsuits, brought by transparency advocate Josh Stanfield and WTVR reporter Tyler Layne, were later dismissed after the city agreed to release the documents.

On Wednesday, Richmond spokesperson Ross Catrow said the city can't comment on ongoing litigation. Sarah Robb, the attorney for Clay, said the ruling was what they "anticipated based on the law," adding, "We hope this facilitates resolution."