Dr. Beth Fischgrund Wins $13.8M in CDCR Retaliation Case
Table of Contents
Case Background
Dr. Beth Fischgrund, a medical professional, commenced her legal action against her employer, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), on July 1, 2020. She charged the state agency with engaging in a systematic pattern of workplace retaliation, discrimination, and defamation following her complaints about alleged misconduct and unsafe conditions within the department. After nearly five years of pretrial proceedings and discovery, the matter finally proceeded to trial on September 29, 2025, in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento. The central issue the jury had to determine was whether CDCR had unlawfully retaliated against Dr. Fischgrund for engaging in legally protected activities, and if the department had also defamed her, causing significant professional and personal harm.
Cause
The core of Dr. Fischgrund’s lawsuit centered on whistleblowing and subsequent retaliation. She had alerted management to what she believed were violations of law, improper governmental activity, and an unsafe work environment that threatened the health and safety of employees. According to the complaint, CDCR subsequently subjected her to various punitive and adverse employment actions intended to silence her and push her out of her position. The legal theories included violations of California's primary whistleblower protections and Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) retaliation statutes.
Injury
Dr. Fischgrund suffered substantial injuries, which she attributed directly to the Defendant’s retaliatory conduct. These included significant economic losses, encompassing both past and future lost earnings and benefits, stemming from her separation from the department and its negative impact on her career trajectory. Beyond financial damage, she experienced severe non-economic harm, including emotional distress, humiliation, and damage to her professional reputation, which she asserted CDCR’s defamatory statements had specifically caused.
Damages Sought
The official complaint requested a judgment for general and special damages according to proof at trial. While the initial filing did not specify an exact dollar amount, the trial evidence and the subsequent jury findings confirmed the Plaintiff had requested a large sum to cover her extensive losses. The final verdict form provided categories for the jury to award substantial amounts for both economic and non-economic harm, clearly indicating the magnitude of the injuries she sustained during her employment tenure with CDCR.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The trial spanned several weeks, with both legal teams presenting their respective narratives to the jury. The Plaintiff argued that the adverse actions taken against Dr. Fischgrund were a direct response to her protected reports, while the defense maintained that any actions against the Plaintiff were legitimate, performance-based, and disconnected from her whistleblower activity.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Dr. Beth Fischgrund
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Lawrance A. Bohm | Andrew C. Kim
Defendant(s): California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Xavier Becerra | Miguel A. Neri | Michael Purcell
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
The Plaintiff’s legal team convincingly argued that Dr. Fischgrund had provided a clear trail of evidence demonstrating she had acted as a whistleblower, alerting her superiors to concerning issues. The counsel maintained that CDCR’s executives knew about her protected reports, and immediately after she had lodged these complaints, they began a series of retaliatory steps designed to punish her. These actions, the counsel insisted, clearly violated multiple California statutes protecting employees from reprisal.
Defense
CDCR’s defense team primarily relied on a general denial of the Plaintiff’s allegations. They asserted that the department had acted lawfully and in good faith concerning all employment decisions involving Dr. Fischgrund. The defense contended that any disciplinary or adverse actions were justified by the Plaintiff’s work conduct or other legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons. Furthermore, the defense had asserted various legal immunities and maintained that the Plaintiff failed to mitigate her financial damages.
Jury Verdict
The jury returned a comprehensive verdict, finding decisively in favor of Dr. Beth Fischgrund on all major counts of whistleblower retaliation and defamation. The jury had carefully reviewed the evidence and concluded that the Plaintiff had met her burden of proof, establishing that CDCR’s conduct was illegal and caused Dr. Fischgrund demonstrable harm. The jury’s determination was clear: the department had violated its legal duties to protect its employee.
Damages Awarded
Having established liability on all key claims, the jury awarded Dr. Fischgrund a total non-punitive judgment of $13,883,723. The jury itemized the award across the categories of harm as follows:
The jury compensated Dr. Fischgrund for her past lost earnings in the amount of $503,376. They also provided a forward-looking award for her Future Economic Loss, totaling $2,304,422.
For the emotional distress claims, the jury awarded a substantial sum for her Past Non-Economic Loss (shame, mortification, and hurt feelings) of $4,095,300, and matched that amount for her Future Non-Economic Loss in the sum of $6,980,625.
Finally, for the specific harm caused by the department’s defamation, the jury allocated additional amounts. They found $1,500,000 for the past and future harm to Dr. Fischgrund’s reputation, and another $1,500,000 for the past and future shame, mortification, or hurt feelings that the defamation caused. The combined effect of these findings resulted in the total multi-million-dollar verdict against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com