On Aug. 14, 2013, plaintiff Brad Duschak, 63, the Vice President of Sales at Skytronics, an aviation overhaul company that was acquired by Phillips Service Industries Inc., got into an argument with a co-worker. The co-work then reported the incident to their management in Michigan. About a week later, on Aug. 23, 2013, Duschak was fired. Duschak claimed that the co-worker’s report constituted malicious defamation and that he was terminated because of the defamatory report and his age. Duschak sued Phillips Service Industries Inc. and Skytronics. He alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted wrongful termination due to age discrimination and malicious defamation. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that the co-worker reported to management that Duschak threatened him by telling him that he was going to “kick his a–.” Duschak denied making the threat. However, counsel contended that after the incident was reported, management decided to terminate Duschak before speaking to him about the incident and chose to act on the co-worker’s complaint without further investigation. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel argued that the real reason for Duschak’s termination was in retaliation for Duschak making complaints about workplace safety issues and disagreeing with the general manager on a number of decisions regarding running the business. Counsel attempted to bring in other workplace history of disagreements with management in an effort to show there was animosity and ill will toward Duschak in order to defeat the defense of qualified privilege. Counsel also argued that the defense of qualified privilege under Civil Code § 47(c) was inapplicable because the alleged defamatory statements were made with actual malice or without reasonable grounds to believe they were true. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel argued that Duschak was terminated because of his age since Duschak was one of the oldest employees in his department and replaced by a younger female. Defense counsel argued that there was no evidence of age discrimination and, thus, focused on Duschak’s claim of wrongful termination due to malicious defamation. Specifically, defense counsel argued that there were no defamatory statements, as the co-worker’s complaint was true and not made maliciously., Duschak claimed that after 30 years in the aviation industry, and 12 years working for Skytronics/Phillips Service Industries, his reputation was destroyed by the defamatory statements. He alleged that as a result, he has been unable to obtain subsequent employment. He further alleged that he suffers from emotional distress due to the ordeal, but that he has not sought counseling for his condition. Thus, Duschak sought recovery of past and future lost wages, and recovery of damages for his past and future emotional distress. Defense counsel introduced Duschak’s prior felony conviction for trafficking in counterfeit helicopter parts. During a courtroom demonstration, defense counsel used Google to search Duschak’s name and showed the jury the first returned entry, which was a Los Angeles Times article laying out in detail the felony charges and the counterfeit parts scheme perpetrated by Duschak, and the resulting felony conviction. Thus, defense counsel argued that the information was readily available to anyone in the aviation repair industry and that this information reflected Duschak’s reputation, which had not been damaged by the defendants.