In December 2021, Dr. Richard Loftus, the former assistant program director of the Internal Medicine Residency Program at Eisenhower Medical Center, filed a lawsuit against EMC, an associated primary care provider group called the Eisenhower Medical Associates (EMA), and a number of individual Eisenhower employees.
The case revolved around certain EMC executives’ resistance to COVID-19-related safety recommendations championed by Loftus in 2020 as the pandemic took hold—and the alleged retaliatory actions taken against Loftus by those executives in attempts to silence his calls for mandatory masking and other measures to protect the safety of both patients and medical staff.
The lawsuit also claimed that Loftus’ supervisor, Dr. Mehrdad Abbasi, harassed and intimidated female residents under his and Loftus’ supervision.
On June 30, 2025, a retired judge appointed to act as the referee/arbitrator on the case found in favor of Loftus, awarding him $1.6 million for a loss of earnings ($600,000) and emotional distress ($1 million). A trial to determine the dollar amount of any punitive damages is scheduled to take place in August.
“This case wasn’t just about me,” Loftus said during a recent interview with the Independent. “It was about so many dozens of us working in Eisenhower who complained about concerns of worker and patient safety during the early COVID outbreak, as well as concerns about a pervasive toxic culture that tolerated sexual harassment and sexist bullying of women, both in the residency program and in the hospital at large.
“The judicial referee, (retired Judge Michael) Latin, agreed with all nine of our points in the case. The hospital … broke multiple laws, not to mention the hospital’s own policies and bylaws. … There was a clear pattern of singling me out for speaking up about the COVID conditions, but also retaliating against me for speaking up about issues of worker and patient safety, and about the issues of discrimination against all the women residents and staff.”
‘A Respected Mentor’ Who Fought for COVID Precautions
In his 52-page decision, Latin goes to great lengths to recount the dynamics at play at EMC during that high-stress moment in history, and explain how he came to side with the plaintiff’s contentions over those of the defendants at EMC.
“Dr. Loftus was, by all accounts, a revered doctor and a beloved and respected mentor,” Latin wrote. “Every testifying physician who worked with him or under him testified about the profound impact he had on their career. He was described by those witnesses as ‘tireless,’ ‘caring,’ ‘brilliant’ and ‘selfless.’ He gave everybody his undivided attention. Several witnesses cried or became tearful when describing the impact Dr. Loftus had on their career choices and trajectories. Prior to the COVID pandemic, Dr. Loftus enjoyed an exemplary employment history with nothing but positive feedback in his personnel file over his 10-year history with EMA.
“There is little dispute that Dr. Loftus, as the pandemic spread, felt that EMC was not being sufficiently proactive. Leadership was not, in his view, doing everything it could to assure the safety of the residents, hospital staff and physicians, or the public at large. It is also beyond dispute that Dr. Loftus made public statements that, in the eyes of the administration, embarrassed and reflected poorly upon the medical center. … While this was occurring, others at the hospital were busy trying to control the flow of information to prevent hysteria, managing the supply of PPE to protect staff and the public, and trying to stay ahead of the ever-changing news on the virus’ spread. Concurrently, others were focused on denying the virus’ seriousness, or the need for protection, and ridiculing and belittling those who were genuinely fearful and aggressive about taking precautions.”
Latin said Eisenhower Health President and CEO Martin Massiello admitted frustration “with Loftus and ‘all of his COVID emails.’ Mr. Massiello formed this attitude toward Dr. Loftus at the very beginning of March (2020), at the start of the pandemic. At trial, Mr. Massiello expressed no sincere acknowledgement, even in retrospect, that Loftus was simply ahead of the curve or legitimately concerned. Looking back, most of what Dr. Loftus warned about was correct. Massiello’s attitude toward Dr. Loftus and ‘all of his COVID emails,’ as well as other expressions of exasperation with Loftus in other emails during the early days of COVID, clearly reflect his bias and treatment of Dr. Loftus in the ensuing months, as Dr. (Abbasi’s) conflict with Loftus eventually came to a head.”
Latin found that Loftus’ complaints about Dr. Abbasi had merit.
“Around the time of the pandemic,” the decision reads, “tension grew in the Residency Program between the residency director, Dr. Abbasi, and other less senior staff, physicians and residents. Many, if not all, of the women who worked under Dr. Abbasi complained that he was sexist; that he would berate and demean others—particularly women; that he treated his position of authority ‘like a dictatorship’; that he belittled staff and doctors who wore masks; and that he prohibited the residents from wearing masks, among other complaints; that he was dishonest and ‘lied all the time’; and that he created a ‘toxic work environment’ for all the residents. … These issues were not new. They had plagued the Residency Program for some time. But they reached a boiling point when Dr. Abbasi revealed himself to many as a ‘COVID denier’ who, in addition to all the other offenses, belittled those who took COVID seriously or tried to take precautions against it. Against this backdrop, Loftus was being criticized by the administration for his proactive advocacy—if not for the positions he took, then certainly for his approach. Several physicians ultimately resigned from EMC because of the toxic work environment Dr. Abbasi created. Many felt, correctly, that EMC ignored their complaints and did nothing to protect them or create a safe work environment.”
“These issues were not new. They had plagued the Residency Program for some time. But they reached a boiling point when Dr. Abbasi revealed himself to many as a ‘COVID denier’ who, in addition to all the other offenses, belittled those who took COVID seriously or tried to take precautions against it.”
retired Judge Michael Latin, in his decision
Latin’s decision discusses several female residents who testified during the trial phase regarding abuse they experienced from Abbasi.
“Morale in the residency program was abysmal due to Dr. Abbasi’s unchecked conduct,” Latin wrote. “When the COVID pandemic hit, the problem worsened. He was a COVID denier who dismissed their safety concerns and belittled those who took precautions against COVID. A common refrain was that he would let residents know that he was the one who decides whether the residents have successfully completed their residency to graduate. As a result, residents lived in constant fear for their futures if they stood up to him.
“These complaints were so universally known and long ignored that even a high-ranking physician who sat on the Medical Examination Committee … herself submitted a gender discrimination complaint about Dr. Abbasi to Human Resources. And even then, nothing was done.”
A Sense of Vindication
The Independent reached out Lee Rice, EMC’s media coordinator and public relations specialist, to talk to Eisenhower representatives regarding the suit. Rice responded, “The trial process is not yet complete; therefore, Eisenhower Health will not be providing comment or participating in interviews at this time.”
Loftus, and his attorney, Jeffrey Rager, said Latin’s decision brought a long-awaited sense of vindication.
“It was apparent to me, even at the time, that this probably was really illegal and unfair, and I also was aware that there were many people who supported me,” Loftus told the Independent. “While there was this story that I was some kind of disruptor to the hospital, there were so many people who were relieved that somebody was speaking up. … One of the concerns the resident doctors had expressed was that they found this culture to be one of toxic tolerance of discrimination. … They were worried that they were no longer free to speak up and give feedback to the program, because instead of being taken as ways for us to evolve and improve, (their comments) were seen as meaningless criticisms and grounds to browbeat people. What’s ironic is the very culture of retaliation that the residents were worried about was demonstrated by the hospital in how they treated me. I spoke up on behalf of the residents, and I was personally retaliated against. I couldn’t ask for a better confirmation that our concerns about the hospital’s culture were spot-on.”
Rager said he has never encountered a case with “such an uncontroverted version of events.”
“From our perspective, like the referee said, there were 30 people who talked in support of Dr. Loftus, as well as to the abuse by Dr. Abbasi … EMC’s policies say, ‘If you have concerns about patient safety or resident safety, come to us. We’ll protect you. If you have concerns about someone being gender abusive, come to us. We’ll protect you.’ (Yet) they retaliated against Dr. Loftus for doing that. So, it’s important because, as the judicial referee noted, all these (defendants) are still in place. Nothing has changed, and there was no acceptance of responsibility at all during trial. It was complete defiance.”
Rager said this defiance was evident in how Eisenhower responded to attempts to settle the case.
“We did try and settle this, and the settlement attempts were not even close,” Rager said. “So EMC brought us to this forum. We were originally in court, and they filed a motion to compel this case into a judicial referee system. The judge was an agreed-upon judge … and so, this is the end result of a continuing pattern of failing to accept any responsibility, (which) I think is highlighted by this decision.”
Loftus said he has no regrets about speaking out about the problems at Eisenhower Medical Center.
“I feel that (the referee’s decision) demonstrates that everything that I stood up for was right, and it’s nice to be vindicated,” Loftus said. “I paid a huge personal price for what they did to me, and I would do it again. I would take a bullet for those residents.”
‘Unchecked Conduct’: A Former Eisenhower Medical Center Doctor Wins a $1.6 Million Judgement Against the Hospital for Disregarding COVID-19 Safety Pleas and Harassment Complaints is a story from Coachella Valley Independent, the Coachella Valley’s alternative news source.