On June 26, 2012, in Van Dunk v. Reckson Associates Realty Corp., the New Jersey Supreme Court reaffirmed the “formidable” hurdle employees need to jump over before an employer can be held liable in tort for an employee’s workplace injury.
Under both New Jersey (NJ) and Federal law, unless exempt, employees who work more than forty (40) hours in a given week are required to be paid at least one-and-a-half times their regular hourly rate.
Earlier this month, in Donelson v. DuPont Chambers Works, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that where an employee is rendered psychologically disabled as a result of retaliation for engaging in whistleblowing activity, he can recover lost wages, without having to prove constructive discharge.
In an effort to ease the tax burden on businesses while reducing the shortfall in New Jersey's unemployment insurance fund, Governor Christie recently enacted a new law that, in pertinent part, changes the way misconduct is defined in the unemployment compensation context.
In Alexander v Seton Hall University (A-87-09), 112310, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed the question of whether a plaintiff can where a discriminatory pay decision is made outside the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination's (LAD) two-year limitations period make out a timely claim under the LAD by arguing the discriminatory pay decision resulted in the payment of unequal wages during the two-year limitations period.
On June 17, 2010, in City of Ontario v Quon, the US Supreme Court held that an employer's review of an employee's text messages, sent via an employer-issued pager, did not violate the employee's Fourth Amendment privacy rights.
In a recent and long-awaited decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court, in Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., held that an employee had a reasonable expectation of privacy in e-mails she sent to her attorney from her personal, password-protected, Yahoo e-mail account using a company-issued laptop.