I have experienced a handful of sad and unfortunate cases where a family member was diagnosed with the onset of Alzheimer’s or another form of dementia.  The family dragged their feet when it came to preparing for the uncertain future of their unfortunate family member.  Only once the family member slipped further into dementia where he or she could no act on his or her behalf did they consider the need for a power of attorney.  Now the family was unable to communicate with banks and insurance companies because they were not authorized to do so. 

A few of these cases came to me for a power of attorney after the point of no return for their loved one, and because their loved one was unable to understand the power they were relinquishing, my office was unable to go through with the signing of the instrument.  If the principal of the document does not have a sound mind and a full understanding of the powers they are giving away and their potential consequences, an attorney is ethically unable to execute the document.  The alternative in this type of situation is to apply for guardianship at your county courthouse, which is a much more expensive and time consuming option.

Try to be prepared for these situations, especially those situation when you are on notice of the pending disability.  It will make coping with the uncertainties of the future that much easier. 

THE FOREGOING IS A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY

 By: Linda B. Maalouf, Esq.

A recent New Jersey Appellate Division case addresses the limitation of whistle-blower protection under New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”). In White v. Starbucks, the plaintiff, Kari White, was a new district manager for Starbucks who was responsible for several Starbucks stores. While performing her duties as district manager, White uncovered and reported violations of company policy by some store managers which included unsanitary store conditions and refrigerator cases that were too warm to safely store food. Following complaints by store managers, White was given a choice between resigning or being fired. White opted to resign, but then filed a CEPA claim against Starbucks. The trial court dismissed as a matter of law. The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal on appeal, relying on an earlier opinion, Massarano v. New Jersey Transit, which states that if the issues on which a CEPA plaintiff bases her claim fall within her job-related dutues, then she is not engaged in activities that are protected by CEPA. White’s claim was held to be invalid based on these cases. If you have questions about how this may ruling affect your rights, contact one of the attorneys at Winegar, Wilhelm, Glynn & Roemersma today. THE FOREGOING IS INTENDED TO BE A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK WITH AN ATTORNEY.

Is Responsible for Coworker’s Sexual Harassment

By:  Linda B. Maalouf, Esq.

New Jersey’s Appellate Division reversed a trial court’s decision to dismiss two employees’ sexual harassment case against their employer, the Mercer County Youth Detention Center. In Wallace v. Mercer County Youth Detention Center, two female employees who worked for the Mercer County Youth Detention Center claimed a male coworker sexually harassed them. Both women complained about the sexual harassment. After conducting an investigation, the employer concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support their claims. The two women then filed a sexual harassment lawsuit.

Despite that the trial judge found that the women had enough evidence to prove that their coworker sexually harassed them, the case was dismissed because the court concluded that their employer could not be held liable for the harassment where the alleged harasser was not a supervisor, and the women did not have any evidence that their employer was aware of the harassment but failed to respond to it.

The Appellate Division disagreed with the trial court’s decision to dismiss the case. It explained that an employee might be able to prove her employer is liable for harassment committed by a supervisor or coworker if the employer did not have an effective anti-harassment policy, which is a question for a jury to decide. The case was then sent back to the trial level to be decided by a jury.

If you believe you may have been the victim of sexual harassment in the workplace, and have questions about how this ruling may affect you, contact one of the experienced attorneys at Winegar, Wilhelm, Glynn & Roemersma today.

THE FOREGOING IS INTENDED TO BE A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK WITH AN ATTORNEY.

By:  Jason D. Briel, Esq.

A bill has been proposed in the New Jersey State Assmebly that would further strengthen what is already considered one of the strictest driving learners permits programs in the country.  The proposed bill would extend the current six (6) month learners permit stage to one (1) year and the teen driver would need to practice for up to one-hundred (100) hours on the road. 

Furthermore, a parent of a teen with a learner’s permit would need to take a teen drivers orientation.

In the recent past, New Jersey has employed other safety precautions regarding teen drivers, including a decal to represent drivers under eighteen (18) and a limit of one passenger for drivers under eighteen (18).

THE FOREGOING IS A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY

By: Jennifer L. Toth, Esq.

Starting this week, as a result of the health care reform law, $40 million in Medicaid funds will be distributed to 30 different hospitals and 40 practices that have upgraded from paper files to electronic record systems. The purpose of the upgrade is to improve efficiency and catch mistakes before they happen. The hospital receiving the largest award thus far is Newark’s Beth Israel Medical Center in Newark, in the amount of $2.96 million. 

These disbursements are the first of a more than $500 million dollar federal stimulus that will be offered to hospitals and clinics that treat disabled and poor patients under Medicaid.

All money the providers receive must be used toward the cost of installing and utilizing the electronic record systems. Under the health care reform law, medical providers that fail to upgrade to electronic records will see a reduction in their Medicaid reimbursements.

THE FOREGOING IS A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY

On an Employer’s Hiring Decision

By:  Linda B. Maalouf, Esq.

In a recent decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers the State of New Jersey, the Court ruled that an employer may use evidence of an applicant’s former bankruptcy when deciding whether to hire that applicant. The Court in Rea v. Federated Investors was asked to decide whether the use of a prior bankruptcy to refuse to hire someone would constitute some form of discrimination. The Court unanimously held that it is lawful for an employer to review the bankruptcy court records for evidence of prior bankruptcies, and use that existence when deciding whether to hire someone. The Court did not distinguish between employers in the financial/banking industry and other employers, thereby impliedly making its ruling applicable to all employers.

If you have questions about this ruling or how it may affect you, contact one of the experienced attorneys at Winegar, Wilhelm, Glynn & Roemersma today.

THE FOREGOING IS INTENDED TO BE A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK WITH AN ATTORNEY.

By:  Jason D. Briel, Esq.

New Jersey has finally found a community willing to support a facility for the growth and distribution of medical marijuana.

Compassionate Care Foundation, a non-profit group, will be opening an 85,000 square foot facility in Egg Harbor Township this fall.  As noted in prior posts, the NJ law legalizing the growth and distribution of medical marijuana actually authorized the opening of six such facilities.  However, up until the announcement of the Egg Harbor facility, protests by residents in other communities which were mentioned as possible destinations for new facilities caused those communities to back out.

THE FOREGOING IS A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE LAW AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY