She says her reviews were wrong - and the company refused to fix them
A former Eli Lilly executive medical director alleges the drugmaker built a performance case against her and then fired her after she complained of discrimination.
The lawsuit was filed on July 27, 2026 in the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. According to the filing, the plaintiff - a Black woman in her fifties and a physician - was hired in April 2022 as an executive medical director in Eli Lilly's neuroscience business unit. She alleges race and sex discrimination, a hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
The complaint turns largely on HR process: performance reviews, a disputed improvement plan, a 360-degree assessment, and an internal investigation. For HR teams, the allegations center on familiar functions - how reviews are documented, how internal complaints are handled, and how a performance improvement plan is applied.
At the center of the filing is the allegation that the company relied on feedback the plaintiff says was inaccurate and then declined to correct it. According to the complaint, when she challenged her second-quarter feedback in May 2025, her direct supervisor acknowledged the feedback likely contained inaccuracies but did not amend it, describing the errors as "low hanging fruit" that could later be used to show improvement. The filing says she was also told the feedback would not affect her bonus or pay. It further alleges that two managers described her outside work as "not real work" and said she must have "just sat there."
The plaintiff raised her concerns with employee relations, the complaint says. It alleges a representative told her the feedback could not be adjusted because it was a "business decision," and that a manager's feedback would stand even if it was incorrect.
The filing then describes a 360-degree review it alleges departed from the company's standard approach. According to the complaint, her supervisor used her own questions, sought input from reviewers outside those the plaintiff had recommended, and asked participants to emphasize where she needed to improve. The filing says several colleagues raised the process with the plaintiff because it made them uncomfortable, and that she never received the full results - only a summary she alleges was inaccurate.
By December 2025, according to the complaint, the plaintiff was placed on a 90-day performance improvement plan and offered a severance package as an alternative, with 48 hours to decide. The filing says she applied for several internal roles despite a company policy guaranteeing employees an interview for internal positions, and was either passed over or had interview invitations withdrawn. The complaint states that Eli Lilly ended her employment on March 19, 2026.
Before filing suit, the plaintiff submitted a charge to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on May 21, 2026 and received a notice of rights on May 28, 2026, according to the filing. She is seeking back and front pay, reinstatement or promotion, and compensatory and punitive damages, with amounts to be determined at trial.
The allegations have not been tested, and no court has ruled on the claims.
