Pla v. Cleveland State Univ.
2016 Ohio 8165
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Maria Pla, a 73-year-old part-time piano/keyboard instructor at Cleveland State University, was not renewed in 2014 after teaching there since 1994. Her replacement was 34 and paid more.
- Department chair Dr. Birch Browning decided not to renew Pla; he initially told her students had failed an internal "Gateway" exam and later cited performance/teaching deficiencies.
- Pla sued CSU in the Court of Claims for age discrimination (R.C. 4112.02(A)) and promissory estoppel; promissory estoppel claim was dismissed at close of plaintiff's case and is not appealed.
- The trial court found Pla established a prima facie discrimination case and that CSU's proffered nondiscriminatory reasons were "likely false," but concluded the evidence was evenly balanced and Pla failed to prove intentional age discrimination by a preponderance.
- Pla appealed arguing that once the employer's reasons were found false, the court was required to find unlawful discrimination; the appellate court reviewed the legal standard de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether finding employer's reasons "likely false" requires judgment for plaintiff under McDonnell Douglas/Burdine | Once Pla proved a prima facie case and showed CSU's reasons were likely false, the inquiry ends and she is entitled to judgment for discrimination | Employer contends falsity of reasons does not automatically prove discrimination; plaintiff still bears ultimate burden to prove age was the real reason | Court held falsity alone is insufficient; plaintiff retains ultimate burden to prove intentional discrimination and failed to meet it |
| Proper allocation of burdens under McDonnell Douglas framework | Burden should shift and, after employer articulates reasons, those reasons must be shown false to prevail | Employer: after articulating nondiscriminatory reasons, plaintiff must show pretext and persuade factfinder that discrimination was the actual motive | Court affirmed McDonnell-Burdine allocation: employer articulates reasons; plaintiff must prove pretext and that discrimination was the real reason |
| Admissibility of post-brief affidavit submitted on appeal | Affidavit is new evidence not part of trial record and should not be considered | CSU moved to strike as outside the record and hearsay | Court struck the additional information; appeals are decided on the record |
| Whether trial transcript should be supplemented to the record on appeal | Transcript was part of trial proceedings and cited by both parties; should be added | CSU opposed but had relied on transcript in briefs | Court granted motion to supplement record with trial transcript |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (Sup. Ct.) (establishes burden-shifting framework for circumstantial discrimination)
- Texas Dep't of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (Sup. Ct.) (clarifies plaintiff's prima facie case and employer's burden to articulate nondiscriminatory reasons)
- St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (Sup. Ct.) (holding that disbelief of employer's explanation does not automatically compel finding of discrimination)
- USPS Bd. of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711 (Sup. Ct.) (explains that once employer offers explanation, presumption drops and ultimate issue is whether discrimination occurred)
- Kohmescher v. Kroger Co., 61 Ohio St.3d 501 (Ohio 1991) (distinguishes direct and circumstantial evidence standards in Ohio age-discrimination claims)
- Coryell v. Bank One Trust Co. N.A., 101 Ohio St.3d 175 (Ohio 2004) (sets elements for prima facie age-discrimination case under Ohio law)
- Imwalle v. Reliance Med. Prods., 515 F.3d 531 (6th Cir.) (definition of direct evidence)
- Dews v. A.B. Dick Co., 231 F.3d 1016 (6th Cir.) (discusses methods to establish pretext)