Shanetta Cutlar: The Perspective of an SPL Escapee
We feel like we’re running an online group therapy session. Pretty much every week, another ex-employee of the Justice Department’s Special Litigation Section (SPL) writes in to us, so he or she can vent their justifiable frustrations whine about the horrific challenging experience of working under super-diva Shanetta Y. Cutlar. Writing in to ATL seems to be a therapeutic experience for these people.
As we mentioned yesterday, one former SPL employee sent us a copy of their completed exit survey. We reprint it after the jump. But first, here’s an introduction to what you’re about to read:
I quit SPL largely because of Shanetta’s mismanagement of the section. I’m attaching a copy I kept of my exit survey — though some of the fields did not print in full, and I redacted some fields to remove info related to my personal identity.Feel free to post any portions you’d like…. You might want to consider submitting a FOIA request for a full copy of this and any other exit surveys or other information related to evaluations / criticisms of Shanetta if you haven’t already done so.
In addition to the written exit survey, I had an exit interview with the front office when I left (which was over two years ago), and I stressed the issues people were having with Shanetta during that interview. So the front office has been aware of the issues with her at least since then, if not earlier.
Interesting. According to this tipster, the folks in the “front office” — i.e., the DOJ powers-that-be — have been aware of Shanetta Cutlar’s distinctive management style for quite some time.
Fortunately, they have had the wisdom to leave well enough alone — despite complaints from folks who just aren’t up to the task of enforcing our nation’s civil rights laws. May Shanetta Cutlar reign forever over the Special Litigation Section!!!
Excerpts from this disgruntled lawyer’s exit questionnaire, after the jump.
Now, we don’t want to get your hopes up here. This completed exit survey doesn’t really contain any new horror stories information about SPL chief Shanetta Cutlar.
But it does provide confirmation, in the form of written documentation, of what different sources have already told us about the Special Litigation Section under Chief Cutlar.
Here’s the first excerpt:
This person left the Special Litigation Section over two years ago. The issues being raised today, and the complaints about that vague thing called “morale,” are nothing new.
If nobody has interfered with Shanetta Cutlar before, why should they start now?
Look, everyone — even fancy-pants “lawyers,” with their expensive legal educations — must do SOME administrative work. It’s a fact of life. So just deal.
To be sure, forcing lawyers to do massive amounts of admin work seems to be a Shanetta Cutlar trademark. Remember Ty Clevenger and the 30+ hours of typing that he and a colleague were forced to do, because SYC allegedly ordered the secretaries not to help them?
We think treating lawyers like secretaries is salutary. Nothing encourages a healthy sense of humility like being forced to do your own typing, filing, and photocopying.
It’s no surprise that lawyers in private practice make WAY more than government attorneys (even federal government lawyers at the DOJ, who are paid better than either AUSAs or state government lawyers). Yawn.
Our source now makes way more money at a law firm than they did at DOJ. But do they have a boss as dynamic and fabulous as Shanetta Cutlar? We think not.
Ah yes — Docket Review under Shanetta Cutlar. We’ve written about this excruciating process in great detail before. This exit survey provides documentary corroboration, from a new source, of information we already had from other sources.
We can’t help wondering: Why does everyone bitch and moan so much about this process? “Docket Review” — taking a look at where all of your different cases stand, together with your section chief and deputies — is routine at the DOJ. So why does everyone make such a big deal about Docket Review with Shanetta Cutlar?
SYC demands that lawyers be prepared when they go in for Docket Reviews. She doesn’t want them to waste her time. And she wants them to know the answers to her questions. Is that so wrong?
This is interesting. For those of you who insist in attacking our beloved SYC, we ask you: Are those four lawyers “favorites”? Or do they simply do better work, for which they are rewarded accordingly?
Jeez, you people cannot stop whining. Stop being such babies!
We like this comment to our last Shanetta Cutlar post:
The comments made on this website are all [allegations], which are unfounded and unsubstantiated. Until these allegations are proven to be true, Chief Cutlar will have the last laugh.I urge everyone to look at the public records of complaints filed against other managers at DOJ. Some of the allegations in those complaints make Mrs. Cutlar look like a saint.
Mrs. Cutlar did not write the book entitled, “How to Be a Rigid Boss,” she simply read the book and followed direction.
In sum, Shanetta Cutlar can be tough, stern, and demanding. Should we expect anything less from our leadership at the U.S. Department of Justice?
Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of the Special Litigation Section under Shanetta Cutlar (scroll down)
(29) 
Comments
Is SYC in cahoots with dealbreaker.com, forcing them to strikethrough all of your witty and inciteful commentary? Is the Diva of the DOJ really all knowing and all seeing??? ARGHHHH!
Oops, clearly it was my computer that had technical difficulties... Pardon the paranoia.
DELICIOUS
I guess the only thing less welcome than a tier 2 grad, in the world of influential law, is a black woman.
Lat, you're doing the crossing out thing wrong - you're supposed to cross out the politically incorrect statement (ie: 'bitch and moan') and replace it with a PC-statement (ie: in this case, something like 'voice their displeasure'). Come on, I expect more from a WLRK-alum.
OK, the rest of the strikethrough style is right, so I'm giving you a pass. For now.
can we make a separate thread to complain about bosses and see who else will join in? i have a particular boss in mind - a media relations director at a large, national nonprofit legal organization.
Technorati: I think that's intentional. Since Lat is pro-Shanetta, he crosses out "vent their justifiable frustrations" and replaces it with "whine," and he crosses out "horrific" to replace it with "challenging."
He strikes through the anti-Shanetta version, and leaves the pro-Shanetta version standing.
Loyola 2L -
No one feels sorry for you anymore (if they ever did). Even if you are at a 2 tier school, it is obvious that all you do is surf the internet all day posting inane comments. Maybe if you actually studied, you could have transferred into a 1st tier, or at least be higher than 25%.
You really need to give it a rest.
Technorati: 4:27 is correct and you are an idiot.
This is what the legal world calls "notice."
3+ years ago, Shanetta was promoted by the Bush Administration over a more qualified white female. She created widespread havoc, and drove out African Americans, whites, liberals and conservatives alike. Now we know DOJ was on notice at least two years ago, but still they haven't touched her. Why not? What does she know? And what, if anything, does her race have to do with her ability to weather all this?Remember, her minions were the first to make an issue of race -- maybe that's why the Bushies who created her are afraid to undo their mistake.
It would be interesting to see other exit surveys of people that have left the Section.
I agree with you SPL refugee. They are afraid to touch her. I wonder why?
Ummm, I understand that they did away with exit surveys and interviews around 2005, so you won't find any recent surveys. I wonder why they did away with them?
If these people think SPL is the worst part of DOJ to work for, they have no idea. Try working for bi-polar immigration judges.
Why would you work for a bipolar immigration judge.
Why would you work for an IJ period?
Ms. Cutlar,
I'ma plaintiffs' lawyuh here down in duh great state of South Carowliiiiienuh and a lordy knows I needa iron fist like yours in my offices. Can't get any of my associates or staff to work that hard. I was athinkin' about uh gettin' into some civil rights' work and I could use your help. You can have the corner office with a great view of the Dairy Queen and Waffle House (that's where we get lunch every day boy iza gettin' fat) and be my "Of Counsel" and tel 'dem associates to get der asses to work! Oh and you get your own conference room too - we ain't usin' that broom closet for nuthin' anyway. You is brilliant so no need to interview - position is yers - just one requirement.
Bein' a respected plaintiff's 'torney down here in South Caroliiiiiienuh, Ima feelin' 'tis imperative that you show the respect that a white man is due from uh black woman, 'kay? Y'all come on down and I'll bring you over fer some fried chicked at my house ennytime! Job is yers!
Not sure whether Plaintiff's lawyer intended sarcasm, satire, or humor, but that was WAY out of line. Crawl back into your cave and keep your mouth shut.
SPL refugee,
I don't work in no cave, I gots me a respectable office sweet in the same shopping center with the Piggly Wiggly and Walmart! Right near the Custard Shack too!
I ain't a keepin' my mouth shut, how else could I be a plaintiffs lawyer if I did that? Oh and yooza lookin' fer a job too? We got lotsa work here down here fer you in South Carowliiiiiiiiineuh, but you might have to have an office next door to the misses who is my new Of Counsel, Ms. Shanetta Cutlar!
Still not funny.
I have to say, I really appreciate how Lat is insulating himself from Shanetta's libel suit when he's quite obviously destroying her career. Not that he's actually libelling her--he's not passing off any of the allegations as true. But she could try to haul him into court anyway if it were at all unclear, so he makes all his literal comments pro-Cutler. Sure, it's meant to be ironic, but ironic praise ("Brutus is an honorable man") isn't libelous. Guarenteed summary judgment. Absolutely brilliant, even if Shakespeare did come up with the general idea first--very worthy of a WLRK alum / former AUSA. Cheers Lat!
The use of the exit interview here illustrates why there is no longer the opportunity to lodge complaints internally. This Administration has no problem with Ms. Cutlar's leadership, at least excluding the recent bad publicity, and is not interested in hearing complaints.
Think about it: You have an Administration not particularly interested in enforcing most civil rights laws, including those within the purview of Special Litigation. And they have in place a Section Chief that is not particularly effective in enforcing those laws. Moreover, that Chief clamps down on the (still) largely liberal staff that may otherwise be proposing new initiatives and more aggressive action. So there is no worry about the political staff holding the bag for decisions not to proceed with the Section's mandate.
On the other hand, the Chief manages to massage the stats into something superficially respectable by focusing on empty numbers rather than real results. And the Chief is a minority person, who could be sold outside the Department as an example of the Division' commitment to diversity and enforcement.
Don't be so sure Ms. Cutlar won't survive this. The question for the political staff is whether the pain is greater to take this hit on a gossip blog or to face the possibility of having to deal with a Chief committed to enforcement.
Revenge is truly a dish best served cold. It kind of doesn't matter now if she stays or if she goes. She's powerless now.
Everyone who works with her or every will work with her now knows she's batshit crazy. More embarassingly, SHE knows they know she's batshit crazy.
She's powerless now.
Everytime she screams at a security guard, or at a law student intern, or generally acts cruel and cazy, it's just fodder for eyerolling snickering behind her back. People will now HOPE she does something vicious and crazy, so that she lives up to her rep as a lunatic.
Every time she looks into an underling's eyes, now she knows he or she is thinking, "What a freakshow." Her behavior is now the source of endless amusement.
I wonder how she feels about this? She can't even fire people anymore. It will just make her look worse to the front office. I mean, 70 attorneys can't be wrong.
Oh, she'll find a way, she won't go quietly into the night, you can count on that! I'll bet she won't change her behavior because she can't without serious medication and therapy as to why she is so insecure to take her own percieved inadequacies out on those who work for her.
DOJ Honors has positions in the immigration courts which are an excellent path to the Civil Division. Lots of people who want to go into non-profit immigration work seek them out too.
I interned in SPL in law school. She was widely-reputed to be a hosebeast then too. Most hilarious is that no one in Washington will touch her with a ten-foot pole when she leaves DOJ. She'll have to move to Little Rock to find employment.
One can only hope that her career is ruined the way she has ruined others. She screwed people who didn't deserve it. I hope she gets hers.
1. Cutlar is a public figure. In light of all the people who have come forward with horror stories about her, both named (Ty Clevenger and Deborah Meiners) and unnamed, it would be tough to show actual malice.
2. There are documents that corroborate the horror stories too. This exit survey, the intern's "Statement of Incident," and all the Ty Clevenger stuff are just examples.
3. I am sure there is no shortage of former SPL employees who would be happy to testify about SYC at a libel trial.
I think that the key word is "exit" interview and not entrance! These people are bitter, because they could not do their jobs! That is why they are no longer with the DOJ, in addition if they focus more on their jobs instead of trash talking, then I am sure they would still be with the DOJ. You do not need to say she has a girlfriend, because she is happily married! She is very talented, and can do the job! Do you have a problem, because she is African-American and telling you other folks what to do? Do you have a problem with her, beccause she is a woman? What is your real issue! Lots of people have problems with their supervisors, because people do not like to be given work direction, and that is why it is called work! So get back to work! I was just thinking that you must be some interesting folks not to be able to stay with the government! You have to work really hard to get fired with the government! How stupid are you? You just have problems with her management style! Get over it! How long should your lunch be? The reason for a "lunch hour" is for an hour lunch! Should tax payers pay for you to do other things that do not pertain to work? Richmond Loves you Shanetta! Go girl!!!