After Dr. Julius Ebinu, a faculty member at UC Davis Medical Center, failed to attend morning rounds, prompting a complaint from the chief medical resident, the department chair sent an email to all clinical faculty reminding them of their responsibility to attend morning rounds. Dr. Ebinu sued The Regents for defamation, claiming that the email impugned his professional reputation. The trial court granted summary judgment for The Regents, concluding that the email was protected by the common interest privilege under Civil Code section 47, subdivision (c), and that Dr. Ebinu failed to present evidence of actual malice sufficient to defeat the privilege.
The Court of Appeal (Third District) affirmed. The court held that the email fell squarely within the common interest privilege because an employer and its employees share a common interest in communications regarding performance expectations. Further, the court held that Dr. Ebinu failed to raise triable issues of fact on the issue of malice so as to overcome the privilege. Dr. Ebinu’s purported evidence of malice—an email from the department chair asking whether Dr. Ebinu was the faculty member who missed rounds and a separate email expressing concerns with Dr. Ebinu’s performance—were not sufficient to show that the department chair harbored hatred or ill will toward Dr. Ebinu.
Ebinu v. UC Regents C101407 
