In 2008, plaintiff Robert Wascher, a surgical oncologist, served as the director of a surgical oncology hospital division and as a medical professor in New Jersey when Southern California Permanente Medical Group hired him as a cancer surgeon for its Orange County Kaiser hospitals. Wascher subsequently signed an “Employee Physician” contract with the medical group in September 2008. According to Wascher, once he began working for Southern California Permanente Medical Group, their relationship progressively soured over the next two years. He claimed that when he raised three primary patient care concerns, he was defamed in response to his complaints and was not allowed to become a partner. Thus, on Feb. 15, 2011, Wascher was informed of his termination. Wascher sued Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals. Wascher alleged that Southern California Permanente Medical Group failed to promote him, wrongfully terminated him, and committed other retaliatory employment actions against him in violation of public policy (Business & Professions Code § 2056 [barring retaliation against physicians who advocate for patient care] and Labor Code §§ 970, 6310-6312). He also alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted, promissory fraud, defamation per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unfair business practices. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc. were sued based on an “integrated employer” theory. Wascher claimed that the three primary patient care concerns that he raised were that there was a lack of timely access to surgery for cancer patients, that general surgeons were doing complex cancer cases that they were not qualified to perform, and that there was no comprehensive cancer care program at Kaiser Orange County. He claimed that despite his complaints, the management at Southern California Permanente Medical Group brushed off his concerns. According to Wascher, he attempted, in a professional and collegial manner, to educate his colleagues on the need for improved patient care at cancer committee meetings by presenting detailed descriptions of procedures with photographs. However, he claimed his efforts only bred resentment and that his colleagues felt he was making the other surgeons “look bad.” He further claimed that his efforts elicited critiques, such as “[h]e’s too book smart” and “[w]e don’t need any subspecialists in our department because a good general surgeon can do everything.” Wascher claimed that Southern California Permanente Medical Group leadership subsequently retaliated against him by closing the highly-regarded “Center of Excellence” for complex cancer surgery that Wascher had initiated with Kaiser’s only other specially-trained cancer surgeon. He alleged that when the specially-trained cancer surgeon refused to do any more complex surgical oncology cases, leaving him with the entirety of the surgery oncology practice, the medical group’s officials repeatedly rebuffed his requests to reduce his non-cancer general surgery caseload, leading to significant delays in surgeries for cancer patients who urgently needed treatment. Wascher claimed that as a result, in February 2011, the medical group formally informed him that he would not be considered for partnership and that, instead, he would be fired in August 2011, at the end of the six-month termination notice period that he had previously negotiated in his contract. Defense counsel contended that Wascher was not a good fit for the surgery department and denied that anyone working for the Southern California Permanente Medical Group treated him unfairly. Instead, counsel contended that Wascher’s claims of defamation arose solely from statements made in the course of a confidential human resources investigation, where those interviewed were asked their opinions about Wascher, and that any such statements were conditionally privileged., Wascher did not incur any economic damages, but he claimed he suffered emotional distress due to his wrongful termination from Kaiser Permanente in Orange County. He also claimed he was diagnosed with residual anxiety as a result of the incidents. Defense counsel noted that Wascher did not seek any counseling or other treatment for his alleged emotional distress. However, in response, Wascher claimed that he could not do so for fear it would impact him detrimentally as a physician.