Defamation Plaintiff Need Not Offer Evidence of Actual Damages, New Jersey Supreme Court Holds

On May 21, 2012, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled, in W.J.A. v. D.A., that a private party alleging defamation need not proffer evidence of actual damages to survive a motion for summary judgment and reach a jury. A-77-10, (N.J. May 21, 2012). The court concluded, however, that in the absence of proof of actual damages, the plaintiff is limited in recovery only to nominal damages (typically a trivial sum of money, such as $1.00, simply to recognize that a legal injury was sustained), and not compensatory or punitive damages.

Changes in the Minnesota “Time Off to Vote” Statute

Minnesota employers should know that Minnesota’s “Voting Time Off” statute (section 204C.04) has changed since the last presidential election. Previously, employees who were eligible to vote were allowed up to two hours of paid time off from work in the morning on Election Day. The amended statute allows employees to…..

Employer's Prior Differential Treatment Of Protected v. Unprotected Employees Saves Claim From Dismissal

Kelly v. Millenium Atlantic City Holdco, L.L.C., 2008 WL 2726878 (N.J. Super., App. Div., July 15, 2008) — Plaintiff, a female radio host, was terminated for making an allegedly threatening on-air comment about a police officer. Before the trial court, she produced evidence that the employer had tolerated comments made by male hosts that were

Defamation Plaintiff Need Not Offer Evidence of Actual Damages, New Jersey Supreme Court Holds

Recommended Reading

Beltway Buzz, October 16, 2020

Changes in the Minnesota “Time Off to Vote” Statute

Employer's Prior Differential Treatment Of Protected v. Unprotected Employees Saves Claim From Dismissal