Rao v. Rao, 2008 WL 2627625 (N.J. Super., App. Div., July 7, 2008) — In a decision that could have far-reaching effects on LAD litigation, the Appellate Division has ruled that actions taken by an employer post-termination can constitute actionable retaliation as part of a continuing violation, even if they are unrelated to the workplace.  In this particular case, the post-termination act in question was to cancel Plaintiff’s health insurance, retroactive to a date prior to his termination.  The Court found that the holding in Burlington Northern v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006) regarding Title VII applies equally to the LAD; that is, the LAD’s anti-retaliation provision creates a distinct cause of action that need not be related to the workplace.

The Court further found that because the Plaintiff did not learn of the retroactive cancellation until denial of a claim for his wife’s prior surgery, his claim could be deemed timely.  The focus of a continuing violation, it said, should be whether the conduct violates the LAD, as distinguished from the continuing effect of a prior violation. The improper cancellation of Plaintiff’s insurance could violate the LAD in and of itself.

Note: This article was published in the August 2008 issue of the New Jersey eAuthority.

Browse More Insights

Practice Group

Employment Law

Ogletree Deakins’ employment lawyers are experienced in all aspects of employment law, from day-to-day advice to complex employment litigation.

Learn more

Sign up to receive emails about new developments and upcoming programs.

Sign Up Now