About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - April 2020)

handle is hein.ali/aliemploy0037 and id is 1 raw text is: EMPLOYMENT LAW Generally N.J.Super.App.Div.2019. Cit. generally in ftn. Former employee, an Illinois resident, brought a lawsuit against, among others, former employer based in New Jersey, alleging that defendants violated New Jersey anti-discrimination statutes. The trial court granted defendants' motion to dismiss. This court reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded, holding that New Jersey law applied to plaintiff s failure-to-promote claim, but that the record was insufficient to determine whether New Jersey law applied to his wrongful-termination claim. The court relied on Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, noting that, generally, the Restatement of Employment Law did not provide guidance on choice-of-law issues arising from interstate employment. Calabotta v. Phibro Animal Health Corporation, 213 A.3d 210, 220. CHAPTER 1. EXISTENCE OF EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP § 1.03. Controlling Owners Are Not Employees Conn.2019. Com. (a) quot. in disc., quot. in ftn.; com. (b) quot. in ftn. Limited-liability company's sole member who had been injured while working part-time as a park police officer appealed a decision by the state workers' compensation commissioner, alleging that the commissioner erred in denying payment of workers' compensation based on plaintiff's income from the limited-liability company and his part-time work. This court reversed the decision of the board, holding, inter alia, that plaintiff was an employee of his limited-liability company because legislative intent behind state workers' compensation laws contemplated the possibility of a limited-liability company being separate from its members and employing them. The court cited Restatement of Employment Law § 1.03 as an authority for the notion that, in certain cases, limited-liability companies could employ their members. Gould v. City of Stamford, 203 A.3d 525, 538. CHAPTER 5. THE TORT OF WRONGFUL DISCHARGE IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY § 5.01. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy Iowa, 2019. Cit. in conc. and diss. op.; com. (e) and illus. 3 cit. in conc. and diss. op. Former employee of state department of public safety sued state and others, alleging, among other things, that he was wrongfully discharged in violation of the state whistleblower statute. The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants. While reversing in part and remanding plaintiff's whistleblower claim, this court held, among other things, that plaintiff was not entitled to a jury trial under the statute. The concurring and dissenting opinion cited Restatement of Employment Law § 5.01 in explaining that, while some states had found the remedies of reinstatement and backpay in their whistleblower statutes to COPYRIGHT 02020 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most