Lochhead, M.D. v. The Regents of the University of California, a public entity

Case Background

On November 11, 2021, Plaintiff Jeannie Lochhead filed a Retaliation lawsuit in the California State, Superior Court of Riverside County (Case number: CVRI2105008).

Cause

Dr. Jeannie Lochhead, formerly a Health Sciences Assistant Clinical Professor in the Department of Psychiatry & Neuroscience at UC Riverside, served from June 30, 2016, to July 6, 2021. During her tenure, she raised serious concerns with her supervisor, Dr. Gerald Maguire, and university compliance officials. These concerns involved the misuse of state funds from the Budget Act of 2018, conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies, and patient safety issues.

Dr. Lochhead reported that state funds meant for expanding residency programs and telemedicine were misused for faculty salaries and unrelated stipends. She also highlighted Dr. Maguire’s problematic relationships with pharmaceutical companies. These included receiving speaking fees and participating in clinical trials while endorsing specific drugs. Additionally, she was concerned about patient safety due to the improper administration of a powerful mind-altering drug.

Following these disclosures, Dr. Lochhead faced retaliation. In August 2019, Dr. Maguire removed her from her role as Residency Program Director, resulting in a significant pay cut. She was also excluded from key committees, such as the Program Evaluation Committee, Clinical Competency Committee, and Interview Committee. Furthermore, Dr. Lochhead was removed from the CME Event Organizing Committee and lost teaching and research opportunities. She endured increased scrutiny of her schedule, false complaints about her professionalism, and attempts to alter her earned productivity bonus. The work environment became hostile, with Dr. Maguire making unfounded accusations and isolating her from colleagues. This ongoing retaliation led Dr. Lochhead to resign on July 6, 2021, ending her career in academic medicine.

Injuries

The retaliation caused Dr. Lochhead severe emotional distress, including humiliation, embarrassment, and mental anguish. The hostile work environment caused profound shock to her nervous system. Dr. Lochhead experienced ongoing stress and anxiety due to the continuous retaliatory actions. The sudden removal from her position and exclusion from committees not only impacted her professionally but also caused significant emotional trauma. The false accusations and attempts to damage her reputation among colleagues and residents further exacerbated her distress.

The retaliation also damaged Dr. Lochhead’s professional reputation in academic medicine. Being removed without explanation led colleagues to question her competence and speculate about misconduct. Exclusion from committees and teaching opportunities diminished her standing in the department and the broader academic community. Her career advancement opportunities were severely obstructed, with at least one senior faculty member fearing retaliation from Dr. Maguire for writing a recommendation letter.

Damages

Dr. Jeannie Lochhead faced significant financial repercussions due to retaliation. Her removal as Residency Program Director resulted in a substantial pay cut and long-term effects on her earning capacity. The damage to her professional reputation and the abrupt end to her career severely restricted her future employment opportunities. Dr. Lochhead had planned to continue her career at UC Riverside for another 25-30 years, contributing to medical education until retirement.

Beyond lost wages and benefits, Dr. Lochhead sought compensation for emotional distress, including costs for psychological treatment or counseling. She also claimed damages for the harm to her professional reputation, affecting her career prospects and earning potential. Additional economic losses included expenses related to finding new employment and differences in benefits or job security compared to her previous position.

Dr. Lochhead requested punitive damages against Dr. Gerald Maguire, alleging his actions were willful and malicious, with deliberate disregard for her rights as a whistleblower. These punitive damages aimed to punish Dr. Maguire and deter similar conduct in the future.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Jeannie Lochhead, M.D.
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Ivan Puchalt, Esq. | Christian T.F. Nickerson, Esq.

 

  • Defendant(s):Gerald Maguire, M.D. | The Regents of the University of California
    • Counsel for Defendants: Matthew J. Schenck | Stephen E. Ronk  | Erika L. Shao  | Kaitlyn Q. Chang

Claims

Dr. Lochhead filed two main legal claims in a Retaliation Lawsuit:

  1. Violation of the California Whistleblower Protection Act (Government Code § 8547.10): Filed against the Regents of the University of California, Dr. Gerald Maguire, and Does 1 through 50. Dr. Lochhead alleged the defendants engaged in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, and similar acts against her for making protected disclosures. She argued that her reports about misuse of state funds, conflicts of interest, and patient safety concerns were protected under the Act.
  2. Violation of Labor Code § 1102.5: Filed against the Regents of the University of California and Does 1 through 50. Dr. Lochhead alleged the defendants retaliated against her for disclosing suspected violations of state or federal statutes, rules, or regulations. She also claimed protection for refusing to participate in activities leading to violations of law or noncompliance with rules and regulations.

Dr. Lochhead argued that the defendants’ actions violated public policy and constituted wrongful constructive termination. She asserted that ongoing retaliation and a hostile work environment left her no choice but to resign, ending her academic career.

Defense

The Regents of the University of California and Dr. Gerald Maguire filed separate answers to Dr. Lochhead’s complaint, denying all allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. They argued that the complaint failed to state a valid cause of action and that claims for emotional or physical distress were preempted by workers’ compensation laws. The defendants claimed their actions were justified, taken in good faith, and protected by various immunities and privileges. They contended that decisions regarding Dr. Lochhead’s employment were based on legitimate, non-discriminatory business reasons and proper managerial discretion. The defendants also asserted that Dr. Lochhead failed to exhaust administrative remedies, mitigate damages, and that her claims were barred by statutes of limitations. Additionally, they argued their conduct was protected by academic freedom under the First Amendment. Both defendants requested the court to dismiss the complaint and award them costs.

Jury Verdict

On July 5, 2024, the jury awarded Dr. Lochhead was awarded a total of $6.1 million in damages. The jury’s verdict included $5.7 million for constructive termination and $400,000 for emotional distress.

Court Documents:

Available Upon Request