News & Analysis as of

Discrimination › NJ Supreme Court

Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's... more +
Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's race, religion, gender, age, to name a few.  less -
Mandelbaum Barrett PC

New Jersey Supreme Court Invalidates Non-Disparagement Provision Against Alleged Victim of Discrimination and Harassment

Mandelbaum Barrett PC on

In Savage v. Township of Neptune, et al., (A-2-23, decided May 7, 2024), the New Jersey Supreme Court analyzed and invalidated a non-disparagement provision included in a settlement agreement against a plaintiff alleging...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

NJ Supreme Court Applies Law Against Discrimination to Emotional Support Animal Use in Housing

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Requests by a resident to have an emotional support animal that would violate a housing unit’s occupancy agreement must be analyzed under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled. As...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Three Takeaways from the New Jersey Supreme Court’s Decision Invalidating Certain Non-Disparagement Provisions

Saul Ewing LLP on

As most New Jersey employers are already aware, since 2019, the State’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) prohibits employers from enforcing contract provisions that have the effect of preventing an employee or former employee...more

Saiber LLC

New Jersey Supreme Court Holds That Non-Disparagement Provisions Seeking to Preclude Discussion About Claims of Discrimination,...

Saiber LLC on

In a recent unanimous decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that non-disparagement provisions in settlement agreements or employment agreements are against public policy and unenforceable if they seek to bar speech...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Good Cause to Seal Name Change Applications for Transgender Litigants

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Prior to September 1, 2021, name change applications were required to be made public both upon request for inspection (Rules 1:2-1, 1:38-1) and by way of a publication requirement in a newspaper for two (2) weeks specifically...more

Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C.

New Jersey Supreme Court Affirms Appellate Division Opinion In First Published Opinion Concerning New Jersey Pregnant Workers...

Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. on

On March 9, 2021, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its published decision in Delanoy v. Township of Ocean, N.J. (2021). A copy of the opinion can be found here. The case arose from a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

New Jersey Supreme Court “Plants the Seeds” for Increase in “Garden Variety” Emotional Distress Jury Awards

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The New Jersey employers were dealt an “emotional” blow when the New Jersey Supreme Court, in Cuevas v. Wentworth Group, affirmed a trial court’s denial of an employer’s request for remittitur of the...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

New Jersey Employer’s Fear of Employee’s “Ugly Divorce” Forms Basis of Marital Status Bias Claim

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

In Smith v. Millville Rescue Squad, (A-19-14, June 21, 2016), the New Jersey Supreme Court broadly interpreted the prohibition against marital status discrimination in the Law Against Discrimination (LAD) to protect a person...more

Fisher Phillips

New Jersey Supreme Court Broadly Defines “Marital Status” Discrimination

Fisher Phillips on

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently interpreted the state’s antidiscrimination law in an expansive manner, concluding that a broad spectrum of individuals can file suit and claim that their employers unfairly discriminated...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

NJ Supreme Court Finds For Employees In Two Recent Cases

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In two recent cases, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously expanded state law to protect individuals going through a divorce from discrimination, and remanded another case to the trial court with...more

Genova Burns LLC

Unhappily, Ever After: NJ Supreme Court Rules Divorcing Employees Protected by NJLAD

Genova Burns LLC on

Unfortunately, not all marriages are happily ever after. When divorce seems inevitable, losing your job as a result of a looming divorce is something no employee wants to worry about. On June 21, 2016, the New Jersey...more

FordHarrison

New Jersey Employers Cannot Reduce Employees' Time To File Discrimination Claims From Two Year Statute Of Limitations, Rules...

FordHarrison on

The New Jersey Supreme Court has held that employment agreements shortening the time in which an employee may file a discrimination claim against his or her employer under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) are...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

New Jersey Supreme Court Bars Enforcement of Shortened Limitations Period for Discrimination Claims

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The New Jersey Supreme Court has overturned an appellate court decision that allowed a shortened limitations period for filing discrimination claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). Rodriguez v....more

Fisher Phillips

N.J. Employers No Longer Able To Shrink Lawsuit Time Limits - Supreme Court Hands Loss To Employers – But Is There A Hidden...

Fisher Phillips on

The New Jersey Supreme Court just ruled that employers are not permitted to shorten the time frame that workers have to file a discrimination claim under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD), reversing a 2014...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

New Jersey Supreme Court Holds Stealing Documents to Support Discrimination Claims Can Be Prosecuted as Theft

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

In State v. Saavedra (A-68-13, June 23, 2015), the New Jersey Supreme Court upheld the criminal indictment of a public sector employee who stole confidential documents to support her discrimination and retaliation claims. As...more

Proskauer - Whistleblowing & Retaliation

Self-Help Discovery Does Not Immunize Employee from Prosecution, Says NJ Supreme Court

Proskauer - Whistleblowing & Retaliation on

On June 23, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corporation, 204 N.J. 239 (2010), does not bar criminal prosecutions arising from an employee’s removal of confidential company documents to...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

New Jersey Supreme Court Confirms Aspiring Whistleblowers Can’t Help Themselves to Confidential Documents

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a pivotal decision with broad implications for aspiring New Jersey whistleblowers, yesterday the New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division’s finding that no qualified privilege exists to protect an employee...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

New Jersey Supreme Court Reshapes Sexual Harassment Claims

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On February 11, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling that will reshape hostile work environment sexual harassment cases brought under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49...more

FordHarrison

Boon to New Jersey Employers: State Supreme Court Confirms that Federal Faragher/Ellerth "Affirmative Defense" Now Applies to...

FordHarrison on

On February 11, 2015, New Jersey's Supreme Court formally decided an important issue left open for nearly two decades concerning New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination (LAD). In Aguas v. State of New Jersey, __ N.J. __, No....more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide