Doe

Doe v. The Regents of the U. of Cal.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 2024B324717California3,480 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Plaintiffs are two former faculty members at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). In January 2018, UCLA received a whistleblower complaint alleging plaintiffs and a third professor (collectively, the professors) had engaged in serious misconduct. The Regents of the University of California (The Regents) retained an outside independent law firm, Hueston Hennigan, LLP (Hueston), to investigate the allegations. The Regents notified plaintiffs of the investigation in September 2019. On May 4, 2020, Hueston issued a 60-page report (the Hueston report). The report stated Hueston “ ‘interviewed 44 UCLA administrators, faculty, staff, and current and former students’ ”; reviewed hundreds of thousands of e-mails and associated documents and “ ‘numerous financial reports’ which were ‘analyzed by a professional forensic accountant retained by’ Hueston, as well as ‘documents provided to’ Hueston by” the

2 three professors; and conducted full-day interviews with each of the professors (and in one case, two full days). The Hueston report “concluded [the three professors] ‘engaged in improper governmental activities under the University of California Policy on Reporting and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.