Older worked forced to retire New Jersey has an extremely broad anti-discrimination law, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). The LAD became even broader last Tuesday, October 5, 2021, when Governor Phil Murphy signed into law a new amendment that increases the statute’s protections against age discrimination by removing…
Earlier this month, in Pritchett v. State, the New Jersey Supreme Court confirmed that the state of New Jersey and municipalities remain subject to punitive damages under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). Shelley Pritchett worked for the State of New Jersey as a Senior Corrections Officer at the…
A recent decision from the District of New Jersey concludes that, when an employer claims it fired an employee as part of a corporate restructuring, but has no documents to prove there was a restructuring, can be enough to prove age discrimination in violation of New Jersey law. In 2014,…
Today, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that an employee does not need to suffer an adverse employment action to win a claim based on the employer’s failure to accommodate her disability under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). Mary Richter is a teacher for the Oakland Board of…
An employee bringing an age discrimination claim does not need to state the age of the individuals who replaced him in the lawsuit. Rather, at that early stage, it is sufficient to assert that his replacement was “significantly younger” than him. That was the ruling of the Third Circuit Court…
Last month, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed the New Jersey Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”) for the first time. The PWFA is an amendment to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”) that prohibits pregnancy discrimination. Kathleen Delanoy is a police officer. She filed a lawsuit in which she…
Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment’s freedom of religion clause bars employees who work for religious institutions from bringing any employment discrimination claims against their employers if their jobs include performing “vital religious duties.” The decision stems from lawsuits filed by two elementary…
A recent United States Supreme Court opinion, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, rightfully received a lot of attention because it recognizes that federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on their sexual orientation. Although New Jersey and New York law both expressly prohibit sexual orientation discrimination, Title VII…
Our New Jersey employment lawyers understand that times are extremely difficult for pretty much everyone right now. But, fortunately, you still have significant rights in the workplace. Being sheltered in place or quarantined and having to engage in social distancing have become the new normal. The economy has taken an…
Today, in Wild v. Carriage Funeral Holdings, Inc., the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that employers cannot discriminate against employees for using prescribed medical marijuana while off-duty. Rather, doing so constitutes disability discrimination in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirms a…