Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 JULY 2014

CEPA Roundup - July 2014

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

In recent weeks, New Jersey’s primary whistleblower statute—the Conscientious Employee Protection Act—has been the subject of increased judicial scrutiny.

United StatesEmployment and HR

In recent weeks, New Jersey's primary whistleblower statute—the Conscientious Employee Protection Act ("CEPA")—has been the subject of increased judicial scrutiny.

In Hitesman v. Bridgeway, Inc., 214 N.J. 235 (2014), the New Jersey Supreme Court held that, to assert a claim for retaliation under CEPA based on complaints concerning "improper quality of patient care" or conduct "incompatible with a clear mandate of public policy concerning the public health," a plaintiff must, at a minimum, identify a source of law or other authority that sets forth a standard from which to determine whether there was a reasonable belief the employer engaged in the alleged misconduct.

In Stark v. South Jersey Transit Authority, No. A-1758-11T2, 2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1150 (App. Div. May 21, 2014), the Appellate Division held (i) that the plaintiffs' illegal recording of a private conversation did not constitute protected activity under CEPA or the Law Against

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from