06-26-09 STENGART v. LOVING CARE AGENCY A-3506-08T1

06-26-09 MARINA STENGART v. LOVING CARE AGENCY, INC.
A-3506-08T1

In this appeal, the court addressed whether workplace
regulations converted an employee's emails with her attorney --
sent through the employee's personal, password-protected, web-
based email account, but via her employer's computer -- into the
employer's property. Finding that the policies undergirding the
attorney-client privilege substantially outweigh the employer's
interest in enforcement of its unilaterally imposed workplace
regulation, the court rejected the employer's claimed right to
rummage through and retain the empattorney.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

06-26-09 PISCITELLI V. CLASSIC RESIDENCE BY HYATT A-5027-07T2

06-26-09 MARILYN PISCITELLI V. CLASSIC RESIDENCE BY HYATT
A-5027-07T2

Plaintiff, Marilyn Piscitelli, sued defendant, Classic
Residence by Hyatt, for compensatory and punitive damages
arising out of its hiring of an illegal alien, Rosa Marchena,
who obtained employment with defendant as a maid using
plaintiff's social security number and name.

On appeal, plaintiff asserted she, a victim of identity
theft, may recover compensatory and punitive damages from the
employer of the identity thief, based on (1) the employer's
alleged negligence in complying with the federal employment
verification requirements set forth in the Immigration Reform
and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b); (2) the
employer's alleged negligence in not utilizing the federal
voluntary pilot program established by Pub.L. No. 104-208, 110
Stat. 3009-655 to 3009-665, to obtain confirmation of the
identity of the thief; (3) the employer's alleged negligence
enabling the identity thief to obtain employment with it; (4)
the alleged fraud by the employer against plaintiff; and (5) the
alleged breach by the employer of its "contract with the Federal
and State tax authorities" to correctly report plaintiff's
earnings.

We held there is no private right of action pursuant to
IRCA, 8 U.S.C. § 1324a; no negligence cause of action based on
IRCA and the voluntary pilot program for employee eligibility
confirmation; plaintiff's common law negligence claim is
preempted by IRCA, and; we decline to recognize the tort of
negligent enablement of imposter fraud in the context of this
case. We also found no basis for a fraud or third-party
beneficiary claim.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

06-19-09 VAN NOTE-HARVEY ASSOCS. V. NJ SCHOOLS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY A-3115-07T1

06-19-09 VAN NOTE-HARVEY ASSOCS., P.C. V. NEW JERSEY SCHOOLS
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
A-3115-07T1

Defendant New Jersey Schools Development Authority did not
comply with N.J.A.C. 19:38C-5.6 when it selected seven firms to
serve as site consultants with respect to school construction in
special needs districts. The regulation calls for preparation
of a consolidated ranking, including technical scores and
interview scores. The Authority did not prepare a consolidateranking but based its decision on interview scores alone.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

06-19-09 IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF W.X.C., SVP-458-07 A-0347-07T2

06-19-09 IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF W.X.C.,
SVP-458-07
A-0347-07T2

In this case, we held that a sexually violent predator who
did not receive sexual offender treatment while incarcerated
does not have an ex post facto claim when he is committed
pursuant to the Sexually Violent Predator Act, N.J.S.A. 30:4-
27.24 to -27.38.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

06-18-09 CRESPO v. CRESPO (A-0202-08T2/A-0203-08T2)

06-18-09 VIVIAN CRESPO v. ANIBAL CRESPO
A-0202-08T2/A-0203-08T2 (consolidated)

The trial court in this matter found unconstitutional the
Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35,
because, in the trial judge's view: (a) the Legislature's
enactment of practices and procedures for the adjudication of
cases brought pursuant to the Act violated the separation of
powers doctrine; and (b) the Legislature's requirement that such
cases be adjudicated through application of the preponderance
standard, instead of the clear-and-convincing standard, violated
due process principles. The court disagreed on both points and
reversed. In addition, the court rejected defendant's other
constitutional arguments, which the trial judge had also
rejected, regarding the Act's impact on the rights to: bear
arms, trial by jury, the appointment of counsel, and discovery.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

6-25-09 NJ Shore Builders Association v. Jackson and Builders League of South Jersey v. Egg Harbor (A-51/52-08)

6-25-09 New Jersey Shore Builders Association v. Township of
Jackson and Builders League of South Jersey v. Egg
Harbor Township (A-51/52-08)

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially
for the reasons expressed in Judge Winkelstein’s opinion below.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor

6-24-09 Mount Holly Board of Education v. Mount Holly Education Association (A-24-08)

6-24-09 Mount Holly Township Board of Education v. Mount Holly
Township Education Association (A-24-08)

The Court reaffirms the principles articulated in Lullo v.
International Ass’n of Fire Fighters and Troy v. Rutgers: in
general, collective agreements supersede individual contracts.
To the extent provisions in an individual employment contract
conflict or are inconsistent with terms in a collectively
negotiated agreement (CNA), and diminish or interfere with
rights provided by the CNA, the language in the individual
contract must yield to the CNA. Gonzalez’s employment contract
conflicted with the CNA and diminished its specific terms by
depriving him of the right to arbitration; therefore, on remand,
Gonzalez is entitled to a hearing before an arbitrator to
address the grievance filed.

Richard Sadowski
Assistant Editor