first

first

Can someone please provide a legal definition of ream-out session?

FIRST to receive my BAR/BRI settlement check in the amount of $240.00!

1,2,3 - Lame. What part of hit "submit" only once don't you understand? Epic fail.

1,2,3 - Lame. What part of hit "submit" only once don't you understand? Epic fail.

1,2,3 - Lame. What part of hit "submit" only once don't you understand? Epic fail.

1,2,3 - Lame. What part of hit "submit" only once don't you understand? Epic fail.

Paragraph 17 mentions the "ream-out session."

I'm a 1L and I want a job!!!

-nervous T-10 1L

Market closed way up today! I knew the bailout of the rich was unnecessary!

Anyone else notice the button says "Post Comment" and not "Submit"?

-8 (but not 6, 9, 10 or 11)

SASSY

You know, Ms. Cutlar sounds like a terrible boss, but if you read the complaint, it's pretty clear this person needs to suck it up and move on. It basically amounts to an allegation that Cutlar was really mean and the plaintiff's feelings were hurt. Please.

Gentlemen at my legal preparatory academy were, on various occasions, in the habit of failing to acknowledge the corporeal presence of others proximate to them while traveling on that form of mechanical conveyance known by some as an "elevator," or by those more cultured as a "lift." During the course of certain of these occurrences, those whose corporeal existence was disregarded became disgruntled, such that their knickers were twisted and that they engaged in behaviors viewed by most as unseemly, leading said gentlemen to ponder the existential nature of their very beings, and to those of a weaker consitution or possessed of a lack of intestinal fortitude, the watering of the eyes. These events, at least when having occurred in the Department of Justice, were viewed has habitual, commonplace, and accordingly not worthy of further consideration.

Aw, she has only 3 friends on linkedin. No wonder.

this woman sounds like a royal b*tch to work for, but this guy needs to man up and move on. Why would you want to be reinstated if the work environment was so horrible??

I hope he wins. Asshole bosses need to be shown they can't treat people like that without consequences. I just hope that male bosses get a clue too and don't think this lawsuit is just because a woman is a 'bitch' but they are 'just being assertive.'

Nice, 16. I bet you are a transactional attorney.

why did he sue all these other random people who, it sounds like, were not the cause of the problem but tried to help him despite being terrorized by this woman themselves?

Plaintiffs sound like a bunch of wah-wah babies. So-and-so was mean to me! She had her clique and made us feel pooey! If you don't like your job, get another one. If you think your boss picks on you, pick up the phone, dial 9-whine-whine and order a whaaamburger and some french cries.

It's one thing to get berated for things you actually screw up, that kind of sucks, because there's something to it.

21, No complaint ever has fewer than 175 named defendants. Failure to list every War & Peace character on your TTT complaint is malpractice per se.

19,

The consequence for a boss treating employees like crap is that the business suffers. What's a lawsuit going to do other than gum up the legal system with just more frivolous crap?

Not a very well-drafted complaint. It appears that Clevenger included embarassing material with little regard to whether it helped his case. Lots of stuff attributed to unnamed co-workers and dates missing for quite a few events. The reasonable accommodation claim is the only one that has a chance, but the disability is very poorly pled. There may well be problems at DoJ, but Clevenger will have a lot of work to do if he is going to get through discovery and survive summary judgment. Perhaps he's hoping a new regime will settle easily.

why did he sue all these other random people who, it sounds like, were not the cause of the problem but tried to help him despite being terrorized by this woman themselves?

16, I don't think you know what existential means.

Plaintiffs sound like a bunch of wah-wah babies. So-and-so was mean to me! She had her clique and made us feel pooey! If you don't like your job, get another one. If you think your boss picks on you, pick up the phone, dial 9-whine-whine and order a whaaamburger and some french cries.

It's one thing to get berated for things you actually screw up, that kind of sucks, because there's something to it.

ShaneTTTa

What kind of name is "Shanetta?"

Is it wrong to point out that there are two paragraph 53s in the complaint PDF?

I went to LS with the plaintiff. He's cuckoo (I hope that's not actionable), but just ask the Stanford Post Office what happens when you f*uck with him. I guess one day they misdelivered some mail, and he spent three years avenging the incident.

Woman chases kids while drunk
...and dressed as a cow:

http://www.wlwt.com/cnn-news/17589970/detail.html

I can has Elie's job?

16 FTW! Frat Boy went out and got himself a brain.

30: She should have a more traditional name, like LaShanetta.

I knew Ty at his former firm. Man, he appears to have really spiralled downward. This is the kind of complaint that a sad and lonely person writes in the middle of the night.

Re: 22, 26

I worked at SPL with Clev. Good times!

Seriously though, my time there constituted the worst months of my life. SPL shared a floor with the Crim section of CRT - and you could, merely by walking the halls, feel when you had moved from when section's territory to the other. As I like to describe it to friends, working at SPL under SYC was like working in a totalitarian state where older employees/deputies would warn you (on the first day after watching the mandatory blood bourne pathogens video) not to trust anybody as fellow employees would seek to curry favor by "selling" your secrets/comments to SYC.

All the same, having left SYC's power, my career has turned out fine, and I learned to be much more appreciative of good work environments. So, thanks, I guess Shanetta - your office was a hell of a boot camp.

Why don't they get rid of Shanetta? She sounds like a petty tyrant. Note to all employees in her section: quit! Defect en masse! You don't have to tolerate a terrible boss - so give her the heave ho.

I went to LS with the plaintiff. He's cuckoo (I hope that's not actionable), but just ask the Stanford Post Office what happens when you f*uck with him. I guess one day they misdelivered some mail, and he spent three years avenging the incident.

Re: 39
Cleve is a fighter. But I worked with him at SPL - on this he wasn't cuckoo in imagining things (talk to anybody in SPL - he's accurately describing the place) - rather he was cuckoo in thinking he could make a difference.

Or maybe not. We'll see.

To the posters who worked there, was Shanetta a good lawyer? If she was no good AND acting like this, that's extra bad.

what a cunt.

More stories from SPL - my job there consisted - I kid you not - of surfing the internet and looking for "leads." There was little to no legal writing that took place in that office, and those who formerly had any skills when they got there in writing watched them atrophy in the sewage of less-than-mediocreness that consisted of SYC approved memos.

As for how a DOJ "litigating" section can get away with so little legal writing - the answer is in the statute they enforce. CRIPA and the Crime Control Act don't actually have much of any cases talking about them. All the writing is pretty much putting down facts and autobriefing it, but at a much lower level than any DA could do.

Now Clev had previously said in his stuff that SYC was this great person who had attention to details. That might be the case, if the details involved spacing between words or screwed up punctuation. If the detail involved actual WRITING (nonlegal) however, I don't think I could agree. The quality of writing I saw there was........not up to snuff. The organization of memos made little sense, they barely flowed, and were littered with passive tense.

Throw in the fact that touring facilities basically consisted of taking dictation of what the experts were saying and you got a section that carries the DOJ for young attorneys, but gives them training to be legal secretaries, event planners, or, at best, paralegals.

More stories from SPL - my job there consisted - I kid you not - of surfing the internet and looking for "leads." There was little to no legal writing that took place in that office, and those who formerly had any skills when they got there in writing watched them atrophy in the sewage of less-than-mediocreness that consisted of SYC approved memos.

As for how a DOJ "litigating" section can get away with so little legal writing - the answer is in the statute they enforce. CRIPA and the Crime Control Act don't actually have much of any cases talking about them. All the writing is pretty much putting down facts and autobriefing it, but at a much lower level than any DA could do.

Now Clev had previously said in his stuff that SYC was this great person who had attention to details. That might be the case, if the details involved spacing between words or screwed up punctuation. If the detail involved actual WRITING (nonlegal) however, I don't think I could agree. The quality of writing I saw there was........not up to snuff. The organization of memos made little sense, they barely flowed, and were littered with passive tense.

Throw in the fact that touring facilities basically consisted of taking dictation of what the experts were saying and you got a section that carries the DOJ name for young attorneys, but gives them training to be legal secretaries, event planners, or, at best, paralegals.

good work burning your bridges. good luck with the job search, idiot.

In honor of 45 (if he was refering to me, I'm long outside of SYC's reach), yet another SPL story (well more like a funny anecdote).

Shortly after I announced I was leaving, one of the managers pulled me aside and said "good for you - i may look strong, but this job makes me cry myself to sleep once a week."

Good times!

I don't know what I would have done if a year had passed without a Shanetta post.

re: 41
I can't tell you if Shanetta was a good lawyer or not. Shanetta was exceptional at playing power games and being an upwardly mobile bureaucrat. She has an aura to her where you talk to her and think "this lady is going places." You meet her and are instantly impressed - and then gradually realize that she is something.........other than what you originally expected.

As for her actual legal ability, I don't think SYC is a particularly good writer, but is one that is quite good at catching small errors, and holding subordinates feet to the fire for mistakes. Having SYC catch a mistake is enough to make your stomach roll three times over - you'll be nauseated for hours - days even if she makes one of her purposefully ambiguous comments to you on discovery.

The problem is that the work involves no real challenge as it is all auto-brief. Hence, the only thing you can really do is screw things up if you are writing as nothing can particularly impress. Which is part of the reason Clev is going to have a hard time if he needs to demonstrate he was a good employee. How can one actually demonstrate that in SPL?

Oops - also re:44 - there is so little legal writing because of the statutes, and the fact that there is next to no motion practice/discovery/trials that occur.

Which is why another former SPL attorney likes to joke that his time there should have been called "working with the Special Compliance Section" as opposed to Special Litigation.

Now, as for Shanetta's abilities as a manager: there is a school of thought that a stern manager can bring value. However, there are limits to this, especially where you are nuking your section's institutional memory through 100%-plus turnover. Further, given how important SPL's mission is (protecting us against jail/police abuses) to have the entire section on the verge of vomiting every quarter while document/docket reviews are given in a "gotcha" style seems to be more an exercise of vanity than an exercise of improving governmental efficiency (though I could see an apologist spin it as the latter).

I read most of the complaint, which was plenty for me.

If his job was really that bad, I don't understand why he didn't just quit. Not the huge salary, I'm guessing. Oh, and not his fear of burning bridges.

43/44 - "passive tense"?? Go hit yourself over the head with a dictionary and get back to me.

"As for her actual legal ability, I don't think SYC is a particularly good writer, but is one that is quite good at catching small errors, and holding subordinates feet to the fire for mistakes."

So she's a dumb despot? Lovely. She must fit in beautifully in this administration. Obsessing about others' small mistakes is generally a method for deflecting scrutiny of one's own lack of intelligence.

I was talking to another former SPL'er last night. Of course Clevenger quickly came up, but the conversation quickly turned to ever-interesting enigma that is Shanetta.

The person I was talking to tried to argue that whatever Shanetta' faults, she is at the very least blessed with a phenemonal memory (which is a position that Clevenger seems to have shared as well).

I am not convinced. The one thing about Shanetta (from my experience with her) is that she (a) makes sure that she controls with an iron hand any meeting agenda; (b) has access (and withholds access) to what a meeting will cover until the last possible minute (i.e. she likes to spring surprises); and (c) that she knows what the meeting will cover, through either her section spies or the case files cold.

The effect of all of this is that you get called into a meeting, with no idea of what it is to cover, and Shanetta will try to trap or surprise you with a small inconsequential detail, and then pounce if you mess up or try to cover your lack of knowledge. Shanetta of course knows what you don't, because she controls the meeting and probably spent time looking things over before.

Why do I think it is this, rather than Shanetta being a "completely immersed section chief"? Because in the instances where I or others were able to redirect the meeting (often with good intentions) to an unexpected area, Shanetta would both begin to stammer and become quite angry. In retrospect, I think it was because any surprise to Shanetta would run the risk of shattering the carefully constructed illusion that she is a detail memorizing savant whose presence we are blessed with.

What makes me further believe this is if you ever try to meet with Shanetta you have to schedule the meeting significantly in advance - impromptu meetings are a big no-no - perhaps because if she is surpised she can't keep the illusion going.

Bottom line - I convinced my co-conversationist to be quite skeptical of her previous conclusion that Shanetta is blessed with a phenomenal memory.

There is definitely a pattern here. Some of you made comments that Mr. Clevenger was a winer.. or baby. Well, how would you feel if you suffered from deppression, requested to be transferred but was not.. but instead made to tour mental health and DD facilities that only made your condition worsed.

Or if you told your supervisor that you need accomadation but was only given more cases than your counterparts and held to higher standards.

Now, if you go back and read all the other stories about this power hungry woman there are similiar complaints, which infact shows a pattern.

Shanetta is very manipulative to the point where she has added information to employee personnel files after the employee has signed the copy.

She plays chess with her employees, just waiting for them to make a mistake and makes deals with thoses that carry out her devilish deads.

She withholds performance awards from those that she don't like or didn't speak to her while walking down the hall.

She will blame you for something that she did wrong and will loose her "phenomenal memory", when reminded .

She manipulates her managers to do her dirty work. The managers will not stand up for an attorney or staffer even when they know that Shanetta is wrong. They will let the employee take the blame.

What about the prohibited personnel practices? I know for a fact that she gave an unauthorized preference or advantage to improve the prospects of a particular manager so that they would received the job.

Or what about the number of step increases and awards that she's given to her good lunch buddy.. Principal Deputy.

Or what about the free annual leave that she gives to the people that she likes. Those people that never sign in or come to work late and are never asked to submit a leave slip, like the rest of the staff who are 5 min. late.

Principal Deputy - i.e. TG, strikes me as basically a good (but cautious) person, who worked her butt off (staying later and working harder than anybody else), and got stuck in a horrible situation, decided to make some compromises. Among the SPL'ers in exile, I know this may be a minority opinion, but it is just the way I feel.

That may not excuse what she has done in her position of authority, but I doubt many would have been able to have done much differently.

I have to say that SPL is the worse section in the Civil Rights Divison. Mrs. Cutlar is a embarrassment to The U.S. Department of Justice. Mrs. Cultar and Management are always lying, sneaky, conniving, toward their staff. Mr. Clevenger, YOU NEVER LIED ABOUT THAT..Mrs. Cutlar is always trying to get her Head Secretaries and Attorneys, Paralegals and Investigators in the pass and present to do her/their dirty work to her support staff.(secretaries wise) If and when you don't, you are on her sh*t list and you better watch out because she is going to make your life miserable if she doesn't try to have you fired first. Mr. Clevenger, I wish you the very best and hope you bring Mrs. Cultar and management down. No one deserve to be treated the way they treat thier SPL staff.

Question - for those of you still at DOJ - how many SPLers were able to escape this past open season? How many do you think are applying for the upcoming one?

Employees applied for open season but were not released. I wonder why?

There is such a simple solution here. Move her to another Section. If she has the same problems, then it's her.

re: 61 - how many applied (that you know of)?

SYC=Satan's Yellow Child

Sometimes when it comes to life "its sad but it true". Trust me the comments about the place pretty much sum it up and comprise just the tip of the iceberg. Man if only those folks who want to call TC a whiner came on over to work. I laugh at the thought. To all the nay sayers and critics - if only you knew. But I think all will sooner rather than later.

We only want Shanetta our "Dear Mom" to judge us fairly based on our work and achievement's instead of receiving a performance rating based on how "She" feels about you. And as some of us just realized, it doesn't matter how many investigations that you have had approved, "Dear Mom" only awards those she favors and beats the rest with a wire hanger.

Why doesn't she just move on, you would think that after being there as LONG as she has that she would want to practice in a different area. I guess she knows that she wouldn't make it any where else.

There would be more written here but people are tired of complaining and nothing being done. They won't get rid her so we just work until we decide we want to go. Civil Rights isn't going to get rid of its only black section chief. Please. They are doing the politically correct thing and not just the correct thing.

There would be more written here but people are tired of complaining and nothing being done. They won't get rid her so we just work until we decide we want to go. Civil Rights isn't going to get rid of its only black section chief. Please. They are doing the politically correct thing and not just the correct thing.

There would be more written here but people are tired of complaining and nothing being done. They won't get rid her so we just work until we decide we want to go. Civil Rights isn't going to get rid of its only black section chief. Please. They are doing the politically correct thing and not just the correct thing.

[Fellow SPL refugee] God I miss that flop sweat and the knot in my stomach every time her name popped up in my in-box. And I fondly remember those bi-annual humiliation/demoralization sessions known as 'docket reviews.' Like any other Stockholm Syndrome victim, I forgot what it was like on the outside and began to see myself as unemployable. Occasionally, I would email friends: "SOS. I'm being held hostage in Special lit. Send Help." It's even tougher out there now in this economy-- I feel for current SPLers. Hang in there...