Glanzman v. Metropolitan Management Corporation

Julia Glanzman (plaintiff) worked as an apartment building manager for Metropolitan Management Corporation (Metropolitan) (defendant). During her employment, Glanzman incurred over $900 in collect-call charges from her incarcerated boyfriend and ordered Metropolitan employees to do work on Glanzman’s own rental properties while on company time and using company tools. Glanzman’s misconduct was discovered, but she was allowed to keep her job after reimbursing Metropolitan. Subsequently, Glanzman ordered a dishwasher for her own use but charged it to Metropolitan, claiming it was for a Metropolitan tenant. When Glanzman’s supervisor, Glenn Fagan, discovered the lie, he fired Glanzman immediately. Glanzman was 63 years old when she was terminated. After Glanzman filed for unemployment benefits, Metropolitan asked her to vacate her apartment, which was provided to Glanzman for free as an employment perk, and challenged her right to claim unemployment benefits. Glanzman then sued Metropolitan alleging (1) age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA); and (2) that Metropolitan retaliated against her for seeking unemployment benefits. At trial, Glanzman testified that (a) Fagan asked her 10 months before her termination whether she had told a tenant her age; (b) Metropolitan had inquired about her retirement plans; and (c) Fagan had told other Metropolitan employees that he planned to replace Glanzman with a younger woman. Metropolitan moved for summary judgment, arguing that it had fired Glanzman because of her misconduct, not because of her age. The trial court granted summary judgment to Metropolitan. Glanzman appealed.