A federal judge did not mince words in describing the conduct of a Chicago lawyer with an allegedly troubled history, who he said pulled "ruses" and "badly mishandled" a lawsuit against City Hall, recommending the lawyer face disciplinary action that could include barring her from practicing in Chicago federal district court.
"Calvita Frederick turned in the poorest performance by an attorney that the undersigned has seen during his 12-plus years on the bench. The court warned Attorney Frederick after the first trial day that she was badly mishandling a potentially winning case," wrote District Judge Gary Feinerman in a Dec. 30 ruling.
Feinerman referred Frederick to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Executive Committee for the committee to decide whether to take action against Frederick.
The committee is made up of Chief District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer, five other district judges, the district magistrate and district clerk. The committee looks after the district court, which includes disciplinary matters. Frederick will be given a chance to respond to Feinerman's report, with the committee then deciding what, if any punishment to impose.
Feinerman issued the ruling one day before he resigned his federal judgeship to return to private practice. He has since accepted a position as a litigation partner at the Chicago law firm of Latham & Watkins.
Frederick represented Michael Outley in an age and race discrimination lawsuit against the city of Chicago and City Department of Water Management officials Alan Stark, Randy Conner and Robert Mussen. Outley worked as an operating engineer for the Department. The case went to trial in September 2022, but, because of Frederick's "persistent flouting" of court rulings, ended in a mistrial after a few days, according to Feinerman, who presided over the case.
On Dec. 30, Feinerman granted defendants' motion to dismiss the case, and at the same time, reprimanded Frederick for her alleged behavior. In discussing Frederick, Feinerman used such words as "bad faith," "intemperate," "dereliction," "pervasive misconduct" and "history of substandard conduct" to describe Frederick's track record.
Feinerman's chief complaint against Frederick was she allegedly tried endlessly to stall and gum up the Outley trial.
Frederick, who was licensed Jan. 6, 1983 to practice law in Illinois, but practiced law in Michigan beginning in 1978, said in court she was not familiar with trial procedures, because she had never taken a case to trial. Frederick admitted her lack of trial experience was the reason behind her tactics, according to court papers.
“I fought so hard to get the trial continued because I’m just physically, mentally, emotionally not up to it," Frederick told Feinerman the day before mistrial was declared.
To this end, Frederick disregarded rulings from the bench, filed a "barrage of meritless" motions and engaged in a "series of ruses designed to obtain a continuance of a trial that she was wholly unprepared to conduct," according to Feinerman.
Frederick also allegedly made out-of-line remarks to Feinerman during proceedings.
"Frederick repeatedly transgressed the bounds of appropriate zealous advocacy in addressing the court," Feinerman observed.
As examples, while addressing Feinerman in court documents, Frederick wrote of “get[ing] ripped a new ----hole" and accused Feinerman of “follow[ing an] ‘alternative speculative realty [sic],'" Feinerman said.
Feinerman pointed out the Outley case was not the first time Frederick has allegedly run afoul of procedures.
"Attorney Frederick has a history of discipline, bringing frivolous claims, and failing to meet deadlines. Last year, District Judge Ellis dismissed with prejudice a case brought by Attorney Frederick as counsel, explaining that there was 'a clear record of both delay and contumacious conduct by Frederick,'" Feinerman noted.
Feinerman added that Frederick has a "penchant of baselessly accusing judges in this District of racial bias when things do not go her way."
Following the declaration of mistrial, Frederick filed a complaint in federal court on behalf of Outley against Judge Feinerman directly. The lawsuit accused Feinerman of violating Outley's constitutional due process rights by allegedly improperly denying him the opportunity to introduce evidence to support his claims of discrimination against the city. Further, Frederick claimed Feinerman then allowed the city to introduce allegedly false stories of misconduct allegedly committed by Outley.
“Mr. Outley was forced to go to trial with his naked testimony, “naked” as in uncorroborated by the documents he could have introduced in support of his testimony,” Frederick said in the lawsuit.
Frederick claimed in her lawsuit that Feinerman's decisions allegedly served to "tip the scale in Defendant’s favor in the ‘he said/he said’ trial (the city defendants) had pushed for and obtained, exactly as they wanted, as a direct result of Defendant Honorable Judge Feinerman’s ruling.”
U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin dismissed that lawsuit against Feinerman in a simple order issued on Jan. 3. The judge cited lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
In direct response to Feinerman's warnings about the possibility of imposing sanctions against her, Frederick had tried to stave off such action by contending that if she is removed or suspended from the district bar, she will be all but driven out of business, which will hurt her clients. However, Feinerman said Frederick has "regularly proved herself to be a detriment to her clients," so removal or suspension will not harm them.
"It is well past time to take appropriate action," Feinerman summed up on Dec. 30.
The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, which oversees lawyers licensed in Illinois state courts, has no record of disciplinary action against Frederick.
Jonathan Bilyk contributed to this report.