UC Irvine Harassment Case: $8.7M Verdict for Plaintiff
Table of Contents
Case Background
Rachel Crary studied at the University of California, Irvine from 2014 to 2018. After graduation, she worked as a Junior Specialist Technician under Professor John Guzowski in the Department of Biological Sciences. In 2018, while working in this role, she experienced escalating misconduct.
Cause
Crary alleged that Professor Guzowski made persistent romantic and sexual advances. He contacted her outside work hours, attempted to socialize with her, and suggested her academic future depended on developing a “close friendship” with him. When she declined, he allegedly retaliated—criticizing her performance, damaging her reputation, and harming her graduate school prospects. Crary reported the misconduct to UCI’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity. However, she claimed the university conducted only a minimal investigation. The situation worsened, leading to her resignation in November 2019.
Injury
Crary claimed the harassment and retaliation destroyed her professional trajectory. She lost career opportunities and suffered emotional distress. The alleged inaction by the university contributed to her departure and damaged her mental well-being.
Damages
Crary sought compensation for lost earnings, future career potential, and emotional harm.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Rachel Crary
Counsel for Plaintiff: Call & Jensen
Defendant(s): John Guzowski | The Regents of the University of California
Counsel for Defendants: Law Offices of Kathleen Rager | Ostergar Lattin Julander, LLP
Appellant(s): John Guzowski | The Regents of the University of California
Counsel for Appellants: Law Offices of Kathleen Rager
Interested Party: Gail Lewandowski
Counsel for Interested Party: Ostergar Lattin Julander, LLP
Claims
Crary filed her complaint in August 2021. She alleged the following:
Hostile work environment sexual harassment
Quid pro quo harassment
Retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and Labor Code
Failure to prevent harassment
Gender-based discrimination
Constructive termination
Defense
The Regents of the University of California broadly denied all allegations and asserted that Rachel Crary’s claims were legally insufficient. They contended that she failed to exhaust administrative and judicial remedies and that many claims were time-barred under applicable statutes of limitations. The Regents argued their actions were lawful, justified, and taken in good faith based on legitimate, non-retaliatory business reasons. They also claimed protections under various immunities granted to public entities and their employees.
Further, The Regents alleged that any harm Crary suffered resulted from her own negligence, failure to mitigate, or unrelated third-party actions. They invoked defenses such as manager’s privilege, the exclusive remedy under workers’ compensation law, and asserted that the university could not be held liable for punitive damages as a public entity. They also reserved the right to raise additional defenses as discovery proceeds.
Jury Verdict
On June 13, 2025, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Rachel Crary, awarding her a total of $8,685,192 in damages. The jury found both The Regents of the University of California and Professor John Guzowski liable for:
Hostile work environment sexual harassment
Quid pro quo harassment
Failure to prevent harassment
Retaliation
Gender-based discrimination
Constructive termination
Court Documents
Court documents are available for purchase upon request at Jurimatic@exlitem.com