A former Drinker Biddle & Reath associate who alleged that four partners at the firm defamed her in performance reviews has lost her bid to revive those claims before a California appellate court.

Ani Avetisyan, who worked in the Philadelphia-based firm's Los Angeles office from February 2012 to December 2013, sued Drinker Biddle for breach of contract and wrongful discharge, among other claims, after she was terminated and opened a solo practice. Avetisyan also sued several partners alleging libel and slander—Michael McTigue Jr., Sheldon Eisenberg, George Caplan and Kristopher Davis.

The Superior Court of Los Angeles County dismissed the claims against the partners and granted summary judgment to Drinker Biddle. The ruling in the partners' favor has now been affirmed by the California Court of Appeal.

In an decision filed Tuesday, Associate Justice John Segal found that the partners were expressing their opinions about Avetisyan in performance reviews and other communications about her, so their statements are not actionable.

“They just said that, in their opinions, her work was not good enough,” Segal said. “Maybe they were wrong. But their statements do not support a cause of action for defamation.”

Avetisyan confirmed Wednesday that she also plans to appeal the trial court's ruling on the claims against Drinker Biddle. Because that is pending, she declined to comment on Segal's opinion.

According to the opinion, Drinker Biddle hired Avetisyan as a litigation associate in L.A. in 2012 from Sidley Austin. She primarily worked with Caplan and Davis, the opinion said, and helped Eisenberg with an appellate matter.

Problems began to arise when Avetisyan was tasked with interviewing another lateral associate candidate, Tessa Raisin, two months after Avetisyan joined the firm, the opinion said. Avetisyan recommended against hiring Raisin, saying she was too informal during the interview, but the firm ultimately hired her anyway, “at the insistence of Caplan and Davis,” Segal wrote.

In November 2012, Avetisyan got her first performance review and alleged that Caplan and Davis were unfair to her because of her recommendation against hiring Raisin. After that, the opinion said, Caplan and Davis began excluding Avetisyan from certain discussions and strategy sessions “in part because Avetisyan, unlike Raisin, did not approve of using profane language or participating in racy conversations about personal matters.”

In August 2013, Eisenberg and McTigue, the firm's then-new litigation chair, informed Avetisyan that she would need to find new employment by the end of the year. They said it was because certain lawyers lacked confidence in her ability to handle the work they needed done, the opinion said.

“Avetisyan thought these reasons were false. She believed the firm was firing her because the firm wanted to appease Caplan and Davis, did not have enough billable work to support two litigation associates and preferred to keep Raisin, and wanted to avoid bad publicity for laying off associates,” the opinion said.

She alleged that Caplan, Davis and Eisenberg accused her of incompetence in their written performance reviews, and that McTigue implied in an email that she was not a capable associate. Avetisyan said the partners interfered with her ability to secure a new job. 

The appellate court disagreed, saying the performance review comments were subjective opinions and judgments, while McTigue's email was not directly about Avetisyan or her ability. And Avetisyan had no existing relationships with potential employers when those statements were made, the opinion said, so there could be no interference.

A spokesman for Drinker Biddle did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.