New Jersey Federal Court Says Remote Employee’s Retaliation Claims Belong in Pennsylvania

Quick Hits

• A federal judge transferred a lawsuit by a former cancer center employee from a New Jersey federal court to a federal court in Pennsylvania, ruling that the case belonged in the employer’s home state rather than where the employee remotely worked. 
• The court determined that the employee’s claims under the ADA had minimal connection to New Jersey, emphasizing that key decisions about her employment were made in Pennsylvania.
• The decision indicates that employers may face fewer legal challenges in states where remote employees reside, and instead, the proper venue may be in the states where employers are based.

On November 10, 2025, a federal district court in New Jersey transferred the former cancer center employee’s retaliation claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where her former employer is based.

The case, Khartchenko v. American Oncologic Hospital Inc. et al., involved a former employee who worked on-site for six years for a Pennsylvania-based company before transitioning to a hybrid remote schedule. She later began working fully remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic and claimed that, after undergoing surgery in January 2023, continuing her remote work arrangement was necessary during her recovery.

However, after a new supervisor implemented a plan to revoke her remote work arrangement, she filed a lawsuit alleging the move was in retaliation for her reporting the supervisor for discrimination and because she required work-from-home to recover from surgery. She initially filed a lawsuit in New Jersey state court alleging violations of the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA) and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD).

The New Jersey claims were removed to New Jersey federal court, and the complaint was eventually dismissed for a lack of connection to the state. The New Jersey federal court then allowed her to file a second amended complaint in which she alleged a violation of the ADA.

Despite amending her lawsuit, the New Jersey district court found that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is the proper venue for her lawsuit, stating that the amended complaint “has little, if anything, to do with New Jersey” aside from the “plaintiff’s mere presence in New Jersey.”

“The fact that plaintiff worked from and communicated with defendants from her home in New Jersey is insufficient to establish New Jersey as the proper venue,” the court said. “Plaintiff does not assert that defendants made any decisions related to her assignment, or remote work schedule in New Jersey. Rather, defendants made such decisions from their corporate headquarters in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Defendants also maintained its employment records in Pennsylvania.”

The court further found that public interest factors did “favor transfer,” and that the employee’s preference for New Jersey federal court “does not weigh heavily against transfer.”

“Most, if not all, all [sic] of the witnesses and documents that would substantiate or refute plaintiff’s claims are located in Pennsylvania,” the court said. “While neither Pennsylvania nor New Jersey appear to have a local interest in deciding this action, practical considerations indicate that Pennsylvania is the more appropriate forum.”

Next Steps

The transfer is a win for employers, suggesting that while employers are generally required to comply with the labor and employment laws of the states where employees physically work, they may not have to face claims in out-of-state venues in those states where their remote employees are physically located. The ruling suggests that the proper venue for employment claims related to remote work arrangements may be in the states where employers are based, where decisions regarding remote work arrangements are made, and where documents and witnesses are located. It is unclear whether the employee will seek to appeal the transfer.

Ogletree Deakins will continue to monitor developments and will provide updates on the COVID-19/Coronavirus, Healthcare, Leaves of Absence, Multistate Compliance, Return to Work, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania blogs as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts