Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.

Workers' Compensation

New Jersey: Exclusive Remedy Rule Does Not Bar Tort Action under State Discrimination Law

Where a teacher filed a tort claim against her employer alleging violations of New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD), contending that the employer had failed to accommodate her pre-existing disability, her action was not barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act. This was the case in spite of the fact that the teacher had sought and recovered workers’ compensation benefits for her injuries. The Supreme Court of New Jersey stressed that the two pieces of legislation should—and could—be harmonized. The WCA and the LAD fulfilled different—although related—purposes.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the co-Editor-in-Chief and Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law(LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ., 246 N.J. 507, 252 A.3d 161 (2021)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.03.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law

For a more detailed discussion of the case, see

Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.

 

 


Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+