In July 2001, plaintiff Van Pena, Ph.D., M.D., was terminated from his position at the Sonoma Development Center, a residential and treatment facility run by the California Department of Developmental Services. He claimed he was terminated in retaliation for filing a complaint with the California Department of Health Services regarding the removal of patient photographs from files at the Sonoma Development Center. Pena was later terminated exactly one week after the Sonoma Development Center implemented a correction plan. Pena sued the Sonoma Development Center’s executive director, Timothy Meeker; the Sonoma Development Center’s Clinical Director, Patricia Rees; Hal Peterson; Jennifer Wear; Denise Sheldon; the California Department of Developmental Services; the Sonoma Development Center’s Medical Director, Judith Bjorndal, M.D.; and Norm Kramer. All of the defendants, except Bjorndal, settled out or were dismissed by the court on summary judgment. The matter subsequently continued against Bjorndal only and the trial resulted in a defense verdict. After an appeal, the matter was sent back for a retrial. (Editor’s Note: A complete report on the prior trial was previously published by VerdictSearch.) Pena claimed that when he became increasingly concerned about the number of suspicious patient in March 1999, he began to take photographs of the patients and put the photographs in the patients’ medical records so that the potential patient abuse would be documented and could be properly investigated. He claimed that he then filed a complaint with the Department of Health Services about the possible medical negligence that had come to his attention. He alleged that in response, the Department of Health Services issued a Statement of Deficiencies to the Sonoma Development Center, requiring Meeker to implement a Plan of Correction to modify the Sonoma Development Center’s policies and to remove the photographs from patient files. Pena claimed that exactly one week after the Sonoma Development Center implemented its Plan of Correction, he was told at a meeting attended by Bjorndal and Meeker that his habit of taking patient photographs was an issue and he was instructed to stop taking these photographs. He also claimed that he developed a reputation among his superiors at the Sonoma Development Center “as a repeat whistleblower whose complaints of patient mistreatment threatened to subject [the Sonoma Development Center] to legal liability.” Thus, Pena claimed that the defendants failed to investigate his claims of medical negligence and that he was wrongfully terminated for making complaints about alleged patient mistreatment. Bjorndal claimed that she only instructed Pena to stop taking photographs of patients without their consent. She also claimed that she terminated Pena because Pena allegedly issued a Do Not Resuscitate Order in contravention of a patient’s “Advanced Directive,” which stated that the patient did not want a DNR issued in her case, and that Pena was dishonest in the ensuing investigation. In response, Pena claimed that all of the doctors involved, including Bjorndal, agreed that a DNR order was medically appropriate; that there was no Advanced Directive against a DNR; that Sonoma Development Center’s own records stated the patient was mentally incapable of giving informed consent for an Advanced Directive; and that the patient’s only family member had repeatedly told Sonoma Development Center that she did not want CPR, or other extraordinary measures taken to extend the patient’s life artificially., Pena noted that he had worked for the Sonoma Development Center from October 1991 to July 2001. Thus, he sought recovery of damages in relation to his wrongful termination.