Court Rightly Heeded CEPA's Language, but Gray Areas Abound
The New Jersey Supreme Court in closed a possible loophole in the state's Conscientious Employee Protection Act that would either have excluded or limited protection for employees whose job duties required warning of or limiting their employer's illegal or dangerous actions.
August 07, 2015 at 10:14 AM
2 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court in Lippman v. Ethicon Inc. closed a possible loophole in the state's Conscientious Employee Protection Act that would either have excluded or limited protection for employees whose job duties required warning of or limiting their employer's illegal or dangerous actions. Courts had found that such employees were outside of the act's protection or that the actions taken against them were subject to a heightened scrutiny standard.
The Supreme Court rejected both of these approaches, and found that the whistleblower law makes no differentiation between a watchdog employee and any other conscientious employee who may seek CEPA's protection. In fact, where the regular duties of the employee requires blowing a whistle when the employer is going astray makes the employee all the more vulnerable to retaliation, and thus the purpose of the act would be thwarted if CEPA's reach were limited, excluding the watchdogs.
We recognize that whistleblowing claims by compliance employees can present difficult questions about the intersection of CEPA rights and the responsibilities of such employees to prevent and remedy violations of law and public policy. But in light of the statutory language at issue, we agree with the unanimous Supreme Court decision.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All2024 Continuing Legal Education Attorney Ineligible List and In-House Counsel Ineligible List
We Applaud NJ Supreme Court's Balanced Rules for Reinstatement of Disbarred Attorneys
4 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Connell Foley; Lindabury; Day Pitney; Archer
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 2A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
- 3Data-Driven Legal Strategies
- 4Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 5Elder Litigators Confront Tough Questions in Last Act of Careers
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250