"The mayor had nothing to do with the contract."---Peter Nickles on Kojo concerning questions related to the parks contracts to Fenty's frat brothers. Then why is there a hearing going on? Maybe Nickles needs to read LL's latest column.

And this from Nickles: "I think Mary Cheh is great....Mary Cheh is a great councilmember."

At this point in the whole Pershing Park court mess, AG Peter Nickles is supposed to just play nice and hope the two big cases settle. Nickles offered up his problematic mea culpa and promised that settlements would be forthcoming. It appears his sweet talk has an expiration date.

Last week, plaintiffs lawyers in the Chang case filed an emergency motion to get the OAG to comply with a request to take a deposition. The plaintiffs lawyers wanted to depose a District official "regarding the District's preservation or lack thereof of electronically stored materials, including e-mails."

This deposition goes to the heart of the entire court mess. And it may be important since the D.C. Council hasn't come close to investigating the Pershing Park discovery problems or the missing evidence in the case.

But the OAG decided to prevent such a deposition from taking place. The lawyers write in their motion:

"Two days before the deposition was to go forward, District counsel unilaterally and without cause announced that the deposition was cancelled, suggesting that it continues to believe its litigation strategy of discovery abuse can continue without consequences."

More on this drama after the jump.

Read More "Pershing Park Case: OAG Reverts Back To Stonewalling" »

Seven years on and still more government documents being "found" and turned over to plaintiffs attorneys in the messy Pershing Park case. Today, AG Peter Nickles filed a notice that roughly 2,000 pages of documents had been produced for the plaintiffs. This is not the first of such notices nor will it be the last.

Nickles writes to the court that "these documents were located as part of the District's sweeps of the OAG Civil Litigation Division." Also included with the production was a privilege log reflecting documents redacted or withheld.

Read More "Pershing Park Case: OAG Finds 2,000 Pages Of Discovery Materials" »

Late Friday, Attorney General Peter Nickles released an opinion stating that the D.C. Housing Authority is required to vet its contracts worth $1 million per year or more through the D.C. Council.

That was a nice, if unexpected twist to the disclosure that his boss, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, had sent $82M in parks construction contracts to DCHA in such a way as to elude council oversight. For once, it seemed, Nickles had put the kibosh on a pet Fenty project.

Today, in a one-page memo [PDF], Nickles says that's actually not true.

Read More "Nickles: Parks Contracts Are OK After All" »

Leave it to NBC-4 (or if you prefer WRC-TV), operators of the worst local news site, to slap a story with some real news value with a sexist headline. The station follows the Nickles-Cheh story with a piece headlined: "D.C. Catfight!"

First Nickles referred to Cheh as an angry woman. Now, a local news channel throws up another sexist cliche. Wendy Rieger needs to start a protest. Wait, is she still working there?

Read More "NBC-4 Takes On Nickles’ Sexism With Sexist Headline" »

I know the fight between AG Peter Nickles and Councilmember Mary Cheh is getting a lot of play on City Desk. LL noted it. And our Weekend in Reviewer picked it up as well. I think it needs a third look. WaPo wrote on Sunday:

“It’s almost becoming a lawless administration,” said council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3). “They seem to have no limits or restraint on what they are willing to do.”

Attorney General Peter Nickles, who often speaks on behalf of the administration, said Cheh “has no idea what she’s talking about.” “For her to make comments like that, it’s stupid,” he said. “She’s an angry woman.”

What struck me was Nickles' blatant sexism (which DCist picked up on). Nickles' comment that "she's an angry woman" feels like he's channeling Mad Men. It's made all the more ironic considering that Nickles had played the race and gender card over the very topic he and Cheh are fighting about: Ximena Hartsock.

Read More "Is Peter Nickles’ ‘Angry Woman’ Comment Sexist? Yes." »

You have questions about the $82 million dollars in parks-and-rec spending that Mayor Adrian M. Fenty is sending to the D.C. Housing Authority? LL has (some) answers!

What are these projects?

According to data furnished by the D.C. Council, they are 12 projects to renovate 12 parks or recreation facilities. One, to build a $1.3 million ballpark at Emery Rec Center, was awarded in January. The rest---concerning 7th and N park ($800,000), Bald Eagle Rec Center ($5.3M), Barry Farm Rec Center ($15M), Chevy Chase Playground ($1.3M), Fort Stanton Rec Center ($12M), Guy Mason Rec Center ($3M), Justice Park ($12M), Kenilworth Rec Center ($12M), Park View ballfield ($1.2M), Rosedale Rec Center ($16M), and a new park in LeDroit Park ($1.7M)---were awarded last month.

Read More "Fenty’s DCHA Contracts: Some Questions" »

Today, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia refused to hear the District's appeal on the legality of  D.C. police checkpoints. On July 10, a unanimous three-judge panel of that court ruled that the police checkpoints---which started in Trinidad---were unconstitutional.

The District's only recourse at this point is to take its case to the Supreme Court.

AG Peter Nickles tells City Desk: "I'm disappointed. We'll look at our options including a Supreme Court request....The D.C. Circuit has spoken and we'll take it from there."

Dee Does the District believes last week's protest will have no effect on Rhee's hold on DCPS:

"The City Council uses only rhetoric to denounce the pairs' actions; remember when Vincent Gray caved and restored the school funding he originally cut? The Washington Teachers Union has been utterly useless in the struggle between 825 and teachers' rights; George Parker continues to cancel meetings and overall, has not been proactive in addressing the layoffs. With the Mayor's reelection looming within a year, there are no candidates that pose a serious threat to him. And while the protests and sit-ins are a start, I seriously doubt Chancellor Rhee or Mayor....o until someone with a better vision and a stronger hand comes along, I think Chancellor Rhee is here to stay, despite what you think of her."

Read More "Our Morning Roundup: What’s On Your Agenda?" »

Yesterday, an arbitrator ruled that the D.C. police department's "All Hands on Deck" initiative violated the officers' contract and must be stopped. Chief Cathy L. Lanier promptly announced that the show must go on, indicating her intention to continue with AHOD weekends scheduled for November and December.

At this point, one cannot be surprised by the city opting for a take-no-prisoners strategy toward litigation. That's par for the course under bulldog Attorney General Peter J. Nickles.

But the decision to continue with AHODs during the appeal process stands to incur tremendous costs to the District in a time when city budgeting is under immense pressures. And not just in legal fees: In his decision yesterday, arbitrator John C. Truesdale awarded overtime pay to officers who have participated in this year's AHODs.

Read More "Is Keeping AHOD Worth a $3M Budget Hit?" »

The back-and-forth continues over the Pershing Park mess in U.S. District Court. Today, AG Peter Nickles filed his response to former Councilmember Kathy Patterson's letter to Judge Emmet Sullivan on Aug. 20.

In his barely three-page response, Nickles provides a nearly substance-free denial of Patterson's claims that his sworn statement had contained inaccuracies. Last week, Nickles had expressed his displeasure to the court that Patterson had jumped into the fray and that her letter had been made public. Again, it all centers around the discovery problems.

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Nickles Responds To Patterson’s Charges" »

Plaintiffs lawyers in the second Pershing Park case have filed their response to AG Peter Nickles' sworn statement submitted to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan on August 12.

Nickles' statement in which he was ordered to explain numerous discovery problems including a missing police document and faulty radio dispatches has come under heavy fire from Councilmember Mary Cheh, Councilmember Phil Mendelson, and former Councilmember Kathy Patterson. Last week, plaintiffs lawyers in the other Pershing Park case submitted their own critical take on Nickles' testimony. They have called for an independent investigation into the missing evidence.

Now comes the plaintiffs lawyers in the Barham class-action case. They too believe Nickles fell well short of an honest explanation of the case's numerous OAG-related problems. In its 32-page rebuttal, they focus particularly on Nickles' claim that he is only now just learning about the missing and/or tampered police evidence.

In fact, they argue Nickles was quite familiar with the Pershing Park case since Jan. 2007. You can read the entirety of their statement [PDF].

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Nickles Could Have Addressed Missing Evidence Long Ago" »

Yesterday, plaintiffs lawyers in one of the controversial Pershing Park cases filed a scathing response to AG Peter Nickles' sworn statement submitted in U.S. District Court on August 12. In their response, the lawyers take a moment to defend one D.C. cop---Sgt. Douglas Jones.

What makes Jones stand out? Jones had testified in a deposition that the now-missing running resume concerning the events of Pershing Park did in fact at one time exist. Jones stated that he knew of at least 12 hard copies that had been made along with two electronic copies. He recalled that his supervisor had requested the running resume. He believed the request had come down from the D.C. Police Department's general counsel's office.

So far, Jones is the only police official who would acknowledge to have seen the running resume. Both Nickles and OAG attorney Tom Koger, in their sworn statements,  make a point of questioning whether Jones told the truth in his deposition. D.C. Police lawyer Ronald Harris said this in his sworn statement about Jones:

"During my involvement as the liaison to the OAG attorneys assigned to the instant cases, I have never seen a copy of the JOCC running resume….Nor do I know of any person who claims to have seen this document other than Sgt. Doug Jones."

Jones is important because of his testimonies embarrassment factor. If his testimony is true it would mean that police officials and police lawyers may have been the last to see a crucial document that has now disappeared. It's not that surprising that the District's lawyers want to throw Jones under the bus.

But there are several reasons why this strategy is a loser.

After the jump, you can read the plaintiffs' defense of Jones,  along with several police documents and deposition testimony from former police Chief Charles Ramsey concerning the running resume issue. The documents and testimony seem to only bolster Jones' credibility.

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Plaintiffs Defend Sgt. Jones" »

Today, plaintiffs attorneys in one of the Pershing Park cases filed their response to AG Peter Nickles' sworn statement submitted to the court on August 12. The plaintiffs' response is a 26-page takedown of the OAG's and the D.C. Police Department's conduct in the case as well as a refutation of Nickles' own sworn declaration [PDF}.

At issue: the missing evidence, doctored or missing radio dispatches, and a discovery process that has lasted for years without an end in sight. Nickles' statement apparently has done little to assure plaintiffs that they will be getting a full accounting of what happened during the mass arrests at Pershing Park---and what happened to all that missing evidence.

The attorneys state that they were so disappointed with Nickles and Co.'s representations to the court, they can only form one conclusion: the need for an independent investigation, and "severe sanctions."

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Plaintiffs Call For ‘Independent Inquiry’" »

Last week, former-Councilmember Kathy Patterson submitted a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan. The letter called into question several statements made by AG Peter Nickles in his sworn submission to Sullivan regarding the Pershing Park case. Councilmembers Phil Mendelson and Mary Cheh have their own critiques. But it was Patterson who sent her letter to the federal judge. The judge then issued an August 20 order releasing it to the various lawyers in the case---but not to the public.

Soon, the letter made its way to the press. Nickles does not approve of this leak. He may have a point. But it seems a little petty in light of the AG's promises of a full investigation into the case's numerous evidence problems. Also, Patterson corrects several errors that she believes were made in Nickles' sworn statement. Is this really the moment Nickles should go back to playing the bulldog lawyer?

Nickles suggests he wanted time to oppose the public release of Patterson's letter. In a filing yesterday, Nickles raises the issue with Sullivan:

"Since Ms. Patterson is not a party to this case, the purpose of the Court's August, Order was to make Ms.Patterson's correspondence available to all parties and also to inform the parties of the Court's inclination to post the correspondence on the public docket and to provide the parties with an opportunity to respond publicly. The Court's Order, however also provided that any objections to the posting of the Patterson Correspondence on the public docket be filed by no later than August 26 and that the Patterson Correspondence would not be made a matter of public record until the Court so ruled."

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Nickles Plans To Respond To Patterson’s Letter" »