Female physician at UCLA claims gender discrimination by male doctors. $14M. Los Angeles County.
Summary
In a retrial of a case first tried in 2018, a cancer specialist at UCLA says that she was paid less than male counterparts and that they discriminated against her.
The Case
- Case Name: Pinter Brown v. UC Regents
- Court and Case Number: Los Angeles Superior Court / BC624838
- Date of Verdict or Judgment: Thursday, May 09, 2024
- Date Action was Filed: Wednesday, June 22, 2016
- Type of Case: Discrimination, Sexual, Employment, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
- Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Joseph M. Lipner
-
Plaintiffs: Lauren C. Pinter-Brown, M.D.
-
Defendants: UC Regents
- Type of Result: Jury Verdict
The Result
- Gross Verdict or Award: $14,000,000
-
Economic Damages:
Past: $2,100,000
Future: $2,500,000
-
Non-Economic Damages:
Past: $5,000,000
Future: $4,400,000
- Jury Polls: 11 - 1
The Attorneys
-
Attorney for the Plaintiff:
Shegerian & Associates by Carney Shegerian, Mahru Madjidi and William Reed, Los Angeles.
-
Attorney for the Defendant:
Gordon & Rees LLP by Stephen Ronk and Erika Shao , Los Angeles.
Facts and Background
-
Facts and Background:
Plaintiff, a medical doctor/oncologist, began working at UCLA Medical in 2005 as the director of the lymphoma program. In 2006 or 2007, she began raising concerns that she was being discriminated against by her male colleagues, and was receiving $200,000 less than them annually. In particular, plaintiff reported discriminatory acts by the chief, the associate chief and another doctor in her program.
The lawsuit was filed in 2016 and contained allegations of gender harassment, retaliation for complaint of discrimination, violation of equal pay and intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation.
-
Plaintiff's Contentions:
Plaintiff was the first and only female to ever serve as the director of UCLA’s lymphoma program, and was forced to resign from UCLA due to gender discrimination. She made numerous efforts during her employment to seek redress for the discrimination, reaching out to multiple resources at UCLA, including the chief of her division, Dean of Faculty, a Title XI officer and others. Her concerns were undermined and left unaddressed, creating intolerable working conditions that forced her to resign in 2015.
-
Defendant's Contentions:
That plaintiff left of her own accord and was never discriminated against.
UC Regents lawyers argued that “In 2011, UCLA began investigating plaintiff’s clinical research after routine audits revealed serious issues with (her) record-keeping and management and plaintiff failed to offer timely responses to audit findings.”
Further, that in late 2015 or early 2016, when Pinter-Brown left UCLA to work at UC Irvine, the plaintiff had all her research privileges and was receiving her full salary, the UC Regents attorneys further stated in their pleadings.
Additional Notes
Pinter-Brown, now 69, won $13 million in the first trial of the case in 2018, but the verdict was overturned by a panel of the Second District Court of Appeal in 2020 on grounds of judicial error.