A New Jersey judge accused of pro-plaintiff bias in issuing a $94,000 sanction will remain assigned to a discrimination suit against Panasonic by three current and former employees, including an assistant general counsel, after the state Supreme Court declined to hear the issue.
In a July 20 order, the court denied Panasonic’s motions for oral argument and leave to appeal in connection with Essex County Superior Court Judge Christine Farrington’s refusal to disqualify herself from Cruz v. Panasonic.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
