In a letter to the Faculty Senate sent Nov. 14, former University President Jim Ryan shared his account of the events which led to his resignation, and said that now-Rector Rachel Sheridan had hired a lawyer to represent the Board and speak to him regarding his resignation. An engagement letter between the Virginia attorney general’s office and Wilkinson Stekloff law firm, obtained by The Cavalier Daily from an anonymous source, confirms that the firm was retained to represent the Board in the days leading to Ryan’s resignation.
The engagement letter, dated June 23, was sent to partner Beth Wilkinson and retained Wilkinson Stekloff to serve as special counsel to the Commonwealth of Virginia and the University’s Board of Visitors for the purpose of an “employment matter.” The firm was hired three days prior to Ryan’s resignation June 26, and Ryan said in his letter that Wilkinson spoke with him June 24 and encouraged him to resign.
“You and your firm are appointed as special counsel to the Commonwealth of Virginia and the BOV for the purpose of an employment matter,” the engagement letter reads.
The engagement letter outlines billing for the first month of work, which was set at a fixed fee of $75,000. It is unclear whether Wilkinson did further work for the Board beyond her initial conversation with Ryan.
At the time of the engagement letter, McGuireWoods law firm was already serving as external counsel to the University regarding seven Justice Department investigations into University compliance with civil rights law which, according to accounts from both Ryan and Sheridan, led in large part to his resignation.
All external counsel for the University must be approved and appointed by the attorney general. The University has hired outside counsel for previous, University-wide matters, but it is unclear whether the Board has hired separate legal counsel or whether it has done so for an employment matter.
Beyond the scope of services to be provided by Wilkinson Stekloff, the engagement letter outlines a series of conditions including fees, conflicts of interest and a confidentiality requirement which also prevents outside counsel from commenting in the media. Wilkinson did not respond to a request for comment. The attorney general’s office also did not respond to a request for comment.
Although accounts of Ryan’s resignation from Ryan and Sheridan both mention the conversation he had with Wilkinson, the two accounts had discrepancies across who asked the attorney general to appoint a firm to represent the Board.
In his letter, Ryan said that Sheridan had suggested he speak to a “friend” of hers, Wilkinson, to discuss what it might look like for Ryan to fight the Justice Department’s investigations. Ryan said that instead, Wilkinson focused “solely on persuading” him to resign.
Ryan’s letter additionally said that Sheridan had not made it clear Wilkinson was already working for the Board. According to his account, Sheridan had told Ryan that they may need to hire Wilkinson when he asked whether the lawyer was working for the Board, although Ryan does not note what date this conversation took place. Wilkinson spoke to Ryan June 24, one day after she was hired, and told Ryan when asked that she was representing the Board.
“This surprised me, both because [Sheridan] did not indicate that [Wilkinson] was already working for the Board, and also because lawyers representing a potentially adverse party have an ethical duty to indicate as much — and not pretend they are the same side,” Ryan wrote.
The engagement letter between Wilkinson and the attorney general’s office states the appointment could be terminated at any time — with or without cause — and that the firm must comply with Virginia law, meaning Wilkinson Stekloff cannot represent adverse parties to the client.
“By accepting the responsibility of serving as outside counsel in this matter, you and your firm agree not to represent parties adverse to the client, the Office, or their respective employees,” the engagement letter reads.
At the time, Sheridan was a Board member — she had been elected in early June to begin her term as Rector July 1. Ryan said that then-Rector Robert Hardie had not been aware Sheridan had hired a lawyer on behalf of the Board. Hardie said in two statements to The Cavalier Daily, one sent Nov. 14 and one Dec. 17, that he fully agreed with Ryan’s account.
“In a heated conversation subsequently with [Sheridan], she defended her authority to hire a lawyer for the Board because she was chair of the audit committee,” Ryan wrote. “I pointed out that even if she had the formal authority, on a normally functioning board the Rector would at least have been notified of the appointment and not told about it after the fact.”
Sheridan’s letter of the events leading to Ryan’s resignation, which she released Nov. 13, also discusses Wilkinson’s involvement, although she does not name the lawyer. However, Sheridan wrote that she had suggested Ryan speak to Wilkinson about the terms of his “potential separation” from the University. She noted that Wilkinson had been retained as legal counsel for the purpose of this conversation June 23.
Sheridan did not respond to a request for comment.
Upon request for comment, University Spokesperson Bethanie Glover said only that, as the document reflects, the firm was engaged by the attorney general’s office.
Read More
Deeds requested a range of records. Here’s what he actually got.
By Nicolas Biernacki | 2 days agoDeeds acknowledged that the University’s FOIA release did not include all of the materials that he requested.
Faculty Senate passes resolution calling for presidential search finalists to ask for pause
By Cecilia Mould | 2 days agoTwo additional discussions focused on the extension of the Representation and Governance committee — a temporary committee established in Spring 2025 — and a new course materials platform the University plans to introduce, titled One Access.
‘A great win’: Mahoney testified for senators on Justice Department agreement Dec. 1
By Luca Bailey | 3 days agoMahoney hailed the agreement as “a great win for the Commonwealth” and for the University despite multiple senators having expressed discontent with the agreement through letters sent to the University.
