New York: (347) 941-0760

Law Offices Of David S. Rich - Employment lawyer

Text Us: (347) 389-7755

New Jersey: (201) 740-2828

Law Offices Of David S. Rich - Employment lawyer

Text Us: (347) 389-7755


Blog

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

Effective May 4, 2016, a new statute prohibits most employers in Manhattan, NYC from discriminating against any individual because he or she gives care, or is perceived as giving care, for a minor child, a disabled relative, or a disabled household member. Specifically, on January 5, 2016, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed, into law, Local Law 1 of 2016 (“Local Law…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

"I married Miss Right. I just didn’t know her first name was Always.” - Red Skelton In New Jersey, may an employer terminate a worker because that worker is having marital problems?  The short answer is: 'No, but stay tuned to this station for further developments.' The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. §§ 10:5-1 – 10:5-30 (the "NJLAD"), renders…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

On October 21, 2015, New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed into law five bills which, effective January 19, 2016, and by means of amendments to existing laws, increase protections for employees against gender discrimination. Among other things, these five bills (collectively, the “Manhattan Women’s Equality Agenda,” the “Women’s Equality Agenda,” or the “NYWEA”) authorize awards of treble damages in…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

The New York Whistleblower Law, N.Y. Labor Law §§ 740 – 741, prohibits all employers from discharging, suspending, demoting, or otherwise retaliating against an employee because the employee, among other independent actions, discloses to a supervisor or to a public body an unlawful activity, policy or practice of the employer that creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

On October 19, 2015, in Davis v. New York Department of Education, No. 14-1034-cv, 2015 WL 6118183 (2d Cir. Oct. 19, 2015), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that “the denial or reduction of a discretionary bonus . . . constitute[s] an adverse employment action,” and thus may serve as the basis for a claim of discrimination…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

The New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J.S.A. §§ 34:19-1 – 34:19-8 ("NJ CEPA"), prohibits all public and private employers from retaliating against employees who disclose, object to, or refuse to participate in certain actions that the employees reasonably believe are either illegal or in violation of public policy. More particularly, the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act bars all…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

Most workers in New Jersey are eligible for temporary or permanent cash benefits, known as workers' compensation benefits, when they are injured by an accident arising out of and in the course of their employment.  See N.J. Workers' Comp. Law § 34:15-1. I have observed a prevalent belief, among both employers and workers, that a business in New Jersey may…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

In addition to the express terms of a contract, "every contract in New Jersey contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing."  Sons of Thunder, Inc. v. Borden, Inc., 690 A.2d 575, 587, 148 N.J. 396, 420 (N.J. 1997); see also Onderdonk v. Presbyterian Homes of New Jersey, 425 A.2d 1057, 1062, 85 N.J. 171, 182 (N.J. 1981). …Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

On July 15, 2015, in Lippman v. Ethicon, Inc., Nos. A-65/66-13, 073324 (N.J. July 15, 2015), the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the protections of the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J.S.A. §§ 34:19-1 - 34:19-8 ("NJ CEPA" or "the Act") "extend to the performance of regular job duties by watchdog employees."  Lippman, Nos. A-65/66-13, 073324, slip op.…Read More

  • By: David Rich, Esq.

“Under federal and NY Law, an account stated ‘refers to a promise by a debtor to pay a stated sum of money which the parties had agreed upon as the amount due.’ ” National Econ. Research Assocs., Inc. v. Purolite “C” Corp., No. 08 Civ. 7600, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24458, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2011) (citations omitted); accord Lankler…Read More

Page 8 of 18:«1... 678910... 18»