Gordon Klein v. UCLA Trial Update – Expert and Student Take The Stand

Gordon Klein v. UCLA Trial Update – Expert and Student Take The Stand

On Tuesday and Wednesday, July 8-9, 2025, trial resumed in the case of Prof. Gordon Klein versus the UC Regents and UCLA business school dean Antonio Bernardo.

Legal Insurrection has been following the dispute since inception. Our first trial report is here:

• Trial Starts In Suit Against UCLA By Prof. Gordon Klein, Targeted and Smeared For Refusing Exam “Leniency” For Black Students

On July 8, Prof. Klein’s counsel withdrew damages claims related to interest and inflation, reducing the $22 million claim to $13 million.

Due to scheduling conflicts, UCLA’s continued cross-examination of Prof. Klein was postponed. The plaintiff then called Laurence Shiekman.

Prof. Klein’s attorneys proffered Shiekman, a trial attorney for over 45 years who has tried 100 cases and retained 50-100 expert witnesses, as an expert on the selection and retention of expert witnesses for high stakes corporate litigation. Shiekman, who regularly hires expert witnesses from the same consulting firms that represent Prof. Klein, stated that a factor he considers in choosing an expert is whether there are blemishes on the expert’s record. He conducts “careful internet research” for “anything we can get our hands on” about the expert’s past noting that it is too risky to present an expert to a jury if that expert’s reputation could be impugned on cross-examination or their testimony excluded entirely.

With regard to Prof. Klein specifically, Shiekman asserted that he now “would never hire him” due to three reasons: 1) the dean deemed it appropriate to discipline Prof. Klein by suspending him, 2) the dean disseminated a mass email in which he characterized Prof. Klein’s conduct as “troubling,” and 3) the dean sent a second email blast referring to an ongoing investigation into Prof. Klein and that statement has never been updated, indicating that the investigation might still be ongoing. Shiekman concluded that, cumulatively, these three actions by the dean suggest that Prof. Klein engaged in morally turpitudinous behavior.

Shiekman opined that had Prof. Klein’s email and the student-led publicity surrounding it existed, but had the dean taken no action against him, the matter would have “blown over.” He clarified that it was the dean’s official actions on behalf of the university that “stuck a knife in [Prof. Klein’s] heart as an expert witness” and not even vindication by the court could repair it.

On cross-examination, co-counsel for UCLA, Evan Peña, represented that 18 million people saw the tweet of Prof. Klein’s reply to the student’s email request for preferential treatment for his Black classmates within the first 48 hours of its posting. He inquired as to whether that exposure was sufficient to damage Prof. Klein’s reputation as an expert witness. Shiekman maintained that the tweet alone was not enough and reiterated that it was the dean’s actions, which legitimized the student claims against Prof. Klein, that diminished Prof. Klein’s marketability. Peña also pointed out that Prof. Klein appeared three times on Fox News television shows and, given that it is a controversial news outlet, asked if Prof. Klein damaged his own reputation with his appearance. Shiekman offered that it does not matter which media outlet Prof. Klein appeared on, but rather what he said during his interviews, indicating that Prof. Klein’s mere appearance on Fox News did not make him unmarketable as an expert witness. Asked if he would hire Prof. Klein, Shiekman vowed, “never, never, never,” because it is not a risk he is willing to take, especially since other experts without “baggage” are readily available.

Peña moved to strike Shiekman as an expert based on lack of qualification and foundation. Judge Ford tentatively overruled the objection as to qualification and stated that any objection as to foundation would go to weight.

The plaintiff next called Leslie Giovanny, the student who emailed the race-based request for leniency to Prof. Klein, to testify under subpoena. [The UCLA Daily Bruin has photos of Giovanny and other witnesses on the stand.]

Giovanny graduated from UCLA in 2021. Giovanny explained that he received the template for the email he sent to Prof. Klein from a Facebook Messenger group chat of about 20 students in his Asian American History class and that he only read the first paragraph of it before sending it to Prof. Klein. He said that he did not think it was political and that “politics did not cross my mind” when he sent it. His testimony was impeached when a video of his 2023 deposition was played in which he clearly stated it was a “political message.” Asked if he found Prof. Klein’s reply email racist, Giovanny said he did not remember. When confronted with the deposition transcript in which he said in 2023, “he’s not racist,” Giovanny admitted that he did not think Prof. Klein’s reply was racist and that Prof. Klein raised legitimate questions to his request. Giovanny confirmed that he did not find Prof. Klein’s reply “disrespectful,” “insulting,” or “callous,” but he thought it was “insensitive.”

Giovanny testified that he shared Prof. Klein’s reply in the same group chat and that the friend of one of the members of the group posted it on Twitter. That same day, Giovanny also sent Prof. Klein’s reply to the associate dean of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion at UCLA because he worried about possibly getting a bad grade in his class out of retaliation, though he ultimately received an A. Giovanny testified that a week later, he also filed a complaint against Prof. Klein with the Discrimination Prevention Office alleging that Prof. Klein was a racist, which was dismissed. To date, Giovanny maintains that Dean Bernardo has never reached out to him to discuss the emails nor complaints.

On July 9, UCLA counsel Peña cross-examined Giovanny asking why he sent the email request to Prof. Klein. Giovanny said that someone in the group chat told everyone to send it to their professors, so he did. He further explained that it was part of a political movement where students were encouraged to seek help on behalf of people who are disadvantaged. At the time, he said, there was a lot of race-based hate against Asian and Black people, which caused stress among these groups of students. In addition to the template, Giovanny testified he received through the group chat a list of colleges targeted under this nationwide campaign.

Giovanny said that when he first read Prof. Klein’s reply email, he was shocked and didn’t know what to feel. He then shared it in the group chat to gauge his classmates’ reactions. He ultimately found the email “antagonizing.” Giovanny testified that he sent his apologetic response to Prof. Klein, in which he apologized four times, because he did not want Prof. Klein to be offended by his request and he wanted to “get back on his good side.”

Giovanny stated that, in his initial reporting Prof. Klein’s email to the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Office, he asserted that Prof. Klein’s email was “extremely out of place.” To further discuss it, the Office arranged a Zoom meeting to talk the next day “about how it made me feel.” He reported that he felt “angry” and “terrified.”

On the complaint form that Giovanny filed with the Discrimination Prevention Office claiming Prof. Klein’s email was racist, he was asked what result he seeks. Giovanny said that he wrote on the form that he “want[s] him to understand that it is not ok to talk to a student like that.” Giovanny conceded during his testimony that he thought Prof. Klein’s email was racist at the time he received it but has since changed his view and no longer thinks it was racist.

On redirect, Giovanny clarified that he was offended by the substance of Prof. Klein’s email and the ideas in it. On recross, Giovanny described the tone of the email as “antagonizing” and “unnecessary” and said that it scared him.

Our next update will include UCLA’s continued cross-examination of Prof. Klein.

[Featured image via Tasha Gailys]

=============

Tasha Gailys is a retired courtroom lawyer who sits in on trials every chance she gets. An alumna of UCLA, she currently lives in Austin, Texas.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.