Physician’s Whistleblower Claims to Proceed Against UCLA

In recent news, the Court of Appeal reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants, the Regents of the University of California (and others), in the whistleblower retaliation action brought by Arnold Scheer, M.D., M.P.H., plaintiff.

The Case: Scheer v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal. 76

The Court: Court of Appeal of State of California, Second Appellate District Division Three

The Case No.: B303379

The Plaintiff: Scheer v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal. 76

The plaintiff in the case, Scheer, brought whistleblower claims in three causes of action. Scheer alleged violations under Labor Code Section 1102.5, Government Code Section 8547 et seq., and Health and Safety Code Section 1278.5. According to court documents, Dr. Scheer alleged the company retaliated against him for whistleblowing about various issues and concerns connected to patient safety, mismanagement, fraud, illegal conduct, and economic waste.

The Defendant: Scheer v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal. 76

The defendant in the case, the Regents of the University of California, successfully moved for summary judgment in the trial court, but the Court of Appeal reversed the decision, holding that the wrong standard was applied to the case in trial court, and citing Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc., 12 Cal. 5th 703 (2022).

Summary of the Case: Scheer v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal. 76

In Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (2022) 12 Cal.5th 703, the California Supreme Court clarified the legal framework that applies to claims under Labor Code Section 1102.5. The recent opinion requires the plaintiff to meet a less burdensome standard for whistleblower claims under Section 1102.5. While Lawson did not specifically discuss Government Code Section 8547.10, the case did require the state Supreme Court to analyze nearly identical language, so the appellate court concluded Lawson’s legal framework can be applied to the Government Code claim in Scheer v. The Regents of the Univ. of California. The Court of Appeal found that the Defendants based their argument seeking summary adjudication of Scheer’s Labor and Government Code claims on a legal standard inconsistent with Lawson. Based on this contradiction, the court reversed and remanded the claims. Regarding Scheer’s Health and Safety Code section 1278.5, the appellate court concluded that Lawson didn’t change the legal framework. However, the appellate court concluded there was a triable issue of material fact regarding the stated reasons for termination, so this claim was also reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

If you have questions about California employment law, retaliation, or need help filing a California whistleblower lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.