A federal court in Cleveland has ruled that our client’s age and national origin/religious discrimination claims must be decided by a jury. Kaplan v. Advanz Pharma Corp., No. 1:24-cv-01500 (N.D. Ohio June 23, 2026) (Barker, J.).
What happened
Marina Kaplan worked as a Regional Business Manager selling a specialty pharmaceutical product. After her employer terminated her, citing poor performance, conflict with colleagues and customer relationship problems, she sued for age discrimination under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Ohio law, and for national origin and religious discrimination under Title VII and Ohio law. The employer moved for summary judgment, asking the court to end the case without a trial.
What the court held
The court denied summary judgment on the age and national origin/religion claims and dismissed other claims. Two points in the ruling matter well beyond this case:
- Pretext is for the jury. Ms. Kaplan offered evidence, including testimony from her former manager, that the employer’s stated reasons had no basis in fact. The court held that whether those reasons were the real reasons is a question for a jury.
- The “honest belief” defense did not end the case. Employers often argue that even a mistaken reason is lawful if they honestly believed it. The court held that a jury could find the employer’s investigation was not reasonably grounded in particularized facts, so the defense itself was a jury question.
Why it matters for Ohio employees
Summary judgment is where most discrimination cases are lost. This ruling shows how a careful record of the employee’s actual performance, and testimony from people who saw it firsthand, can put an employer’s explanation in front of a jury.
The Petrov Group Co., LPA represents employees in age discrimination, retaliation, whistleblower and wrongful termination cases in Cleveland and across Northeast Ohio. Call 216-621-3500.