Goldberg responded to the defense’s arguments surrounding Olivia Truong – a former student of Klein’s who claimed he has a history of sending inappropriate emails – by calling the argument “a weird smear.” He added that Klein was never accused of sexual harassment and said Bernardo’s decision to suspend him was unrelated to Truong.

Sandra McDonough, an attorney for the UC Regents and Bernardo, said the publicity from Klein’s email was enough to damage his reputation alone. She added that screenshots of Klein’s emails received around 18 million impressions across platforms before Bernardo informed the School of Management that Klein would be put on leave.

“This court should not allow Mr. Klein to shift the blame to the defendants for his mistakes,” McDonough said.

Steven M. Goldberg, an attorney for Klein, said the central question in the case is Bernardo’s motivations for suspending Klein. Goldberg added that the University acted out of a desire to appear “strong” and “appease students,” calling the move “ill-motivated” and a violation of Klein’s academic freedom.

The trial concluded with closing arguments from both sides. Klein’s attorney said Bernardo’s emails misrepresented Klein and hurt his ability to attract new clients, adding that Madsen’s estimate of damages was conservative.

Attorneys for the UC Regents and Bernardo said there was no evidence that showed Klein’s administrative leave was the “substantial factor” in his lost income, contending instead that Klein’s own actions were to blame.

(Zimo Li/Daily Bruin senior staff)

Judge H. Jay Ford III said Friday that the trial will resume for closing arguments at the Santa Monica Courthouse on Sept. 5 at 1:30pm.

Heather Caruso, the UCLA Anderson School of Management’s associate dean for equity, diversity and inclusion, testified Friday that she found Klein’s conduct especially concerning due to the broader social context in June 2020.

“It sort of felt like the world was on fire,” Caruso said.

Caruso likened Klein’s email to a neighbor setting off fireworks during the January 2025 Los Angeles County fires. She testified that she was concerned about Klein’s behavior, saying he did not exercise sound judgement when communicating with students and that such conduct was not in line with the school’s high standards for professors.

Vilma Ortiz, the former chair of the Academic Senate’s Privilege and Tenure Committee, testified Thursday. She said the committee, which reviews grievances brought by Academic Senate members who believe that their rights as faculty may have been violated, reached a split vote about whether UCLA violated academic freedom principles by placing him on leave, leading to no formal hearing.

However, Ortiz added that she believed Klein’s email reflected a “significant lapse in judgment,” with a “condescending” and “dismissive” tone where a simple “no” would have sufficed.

John Meyers, who provides vocational rehabilitation consulting services, testified Thursday that Klein earned less money following his administrative leave because of the closure of courts – where he was paid to serve as an expert witness – during the COVID-19 pandemic and general volatility in the expert witness industry. Klein’s administrative leave, Meyers said, was “certainly” explicable to potential clients.

Justine Farrell, the chair of the marketing department at the University of San Diego’s Knauss School of Business, continued her testimony Wednesday.

She said that, based on impression data from Cision, Klein’s media appearances – including him speaking about his administrative leave on Fox News multiple times – created “substantial media attention” around the situation, while the email announcing his leave which was sent to Anderson School of Management students did not.

Mohammed Cato, the director of Title IX at UCLA, testified Tuesday about a Title IX complaint that was made against Klein.

Cato said the office did not proceed with a formal investigation because the affected parties did not want to come forward. Cato said he reached out to Klein on Aug. 27, 2020 to notify him of the complaint, inform him of potential consequences and best practices to take in response.