You searched for: John C. Petrella

Attorneys

Photo of Nicholas R. Amato

Nicholas R. Amato
Of Counsel
973.535.7136

Photo of Victor Andreou

Victor Andreou
Associate
973.646.3283

Photo of Matthew I. W. Baker

Matthew I. W. Baker
Counsel
973.646.3286

Photo of Thomas L. Bellifemine

Thomas L. Bellifemine
Associate
973.230.0162

Photo of Peter F. Berk

Peter F. Berk
Counsel
973.230.2071

Photo of Lawrence Bluestone

Lawrence Bluestone
Partner
973.535.4434

Photo of Jennifer Borek

Jennifer Borek
Partner
973.535.7107

Photo of Celia S. Bosco

Celia S. Bosco
Counsel
973.230.2088

Photo of Joseph A. Bottitta

Joseph A. Bottitta
Of Counsel
973.646.3290

Photo of James M. Burns

James M. Burns
Managing Partner
973.535.7101

Photo of Donald W. Clarke

Donald W. Clarke
Counsel
973.387.7804

Photo of Harrison C. Clewell

Harrison C. Clewell
Associate
973.535.4444

Photo of David P. Cooke

David P. Cooke
Of Counsel
973.309.6076

Photo of Sadayah Durant-Brown

Sadayah Durant-Brown
Associate
973.230.2078

Photo of Brigette N. Eagan

Brigette N. Eagan
Counsel
973.535.7114

Photo of Kathleen Barnett Einhorn

Kathleen Barnett Einhorn
Partner
973.535.7115

Photo of Rebecca Moll Freed

Rebecca Moll Freed
Partner
973.230.2075

Photo of Harris S. Freier

Harris S. Freier
Partner
973.230.2079

Photo of Maria R. Fruci

Maria R. Fruci
Counsel
973.646.3262

Photo of Thomas S. Garlick

Thomas S. Garlick
Associate
973.646.3273

Photo of Bruno Genova

Bruno Genova
Of Counsel
973.646.3261

Photo of Angelo J. Genova

Angelo J. Genova
Chairman
973.535.7100

Photo of Lauren W. Gershuny

Lauren W. Gershuny
Counsel
973.535.4447

Photo of Joseph M. Hannon

Joseph M. Hannon
Counsel
973.535.7105

Photo of William F. Harrison

William F. Harrison
Partner
973.535.4430

Photo of Jeremy M. Brooks

Jeremy M. Brooks
Associate
973.646.3282

Photo of Avi R. Jerushalmy

Avi R. Jerushalmy
Associate
973.646.3295

Photo of Steven Z. Jurista

Steven Z. Jurista
Of Counsel
973.230.2097

Photo of Avi D. Kelin

Avi D. Kelin
Counsel
973.646.3267

Photo of Matthew Kertz

Matthew Kertz
Partner
973.230.2087

Photo of Gregory S. Kinoian

Gregory S. Kinoian
Counsel
973.646.3284

Photo of Keith A. Krauss

Keith A. Krauss
Senior Counsel
973.535.4441

Photo of Latiqua M. Liles

Latiqua M. Liles
Associate
973.646.3287

Photo of Christopher Manley

Christopher Manley
Associate
973.535.4433

Gary N. Marks
Of Counsel
973.646.3293

Photo of Dina M. Mastellone

Dina M. Mastellone
Partner
732.842.2732

Photo of Jennifer Mazawey

Jennifer Mazawey
Partner
973.535.7126

Photo of Nicole L. McCann

Nicole L. McCann
Associate
973.535.4443

Photo of James J. McGovern III

James J. McGovern III
Partner
973.535.7122

Photo of Patrick W. McGovern

Patrick W. McGovern
Partner
973.535.7129

Cynthia Hobson McNutt
Associate
973.646.3171

Photo of William F. Megna

William F. Megna
Partner
973.230.2074

Photo of Charles J. Messina

Charles J. Messina
Partner
973.646.3278

Photo of Albert Mezzaroba

Albert Mezzaroba
Of Counsel
215.564.0444

Photo of Jared J. Monaco

Jared J. Monaco
Associate
973.535.7121

Photo of Emily K. Montagna

Emily K. Montagna
Associate
973.230.2080

Photo of Angela Pan

Angela Pan
Of Counsel
201.469.0100

Photo of Eugene T. Paolino

Eugene T. Paolino
Partner
201.249.8197

Photo of Rajiv D. Parikh

Rajiv D. Parikh
Partner
973.535.4446

Photo of Nicholas J. Pellegrino

Nicholas J. Pellegrino
Associate
973.230.2096

Photo of John C. Petrella

John C. Petrella
Partner
973.535.7108

Photo of Gerard D. Pizzillo

Gerard D. Pizzillo
Counsel
201.249.8361

Photo of Scott S. Rever

Scott S. Rever
Counsel
973.387.7801

Photo of Jeffrey R. Rich

Jeffrey R. Rich
Partner
732.758.0117

Photo of Herschel P. Rose

Herschel P. Rose
Associate
973.646.3276

Photo of Jennifer Roselle

Jennifer Roselle
Partner
973.646.3324

Photo of Ralph J. Salerno

Ralph J. Salerno
Of Counsel
973.535.4432

Brian M. Satz
Of Counsel
973.230.2093

Photo of Gina M. Schneider

Gina M. Schneider
Of Counsel
973.535.7134

Photo of Kenneth J. Sheehan

Kenneth J. Sheehan
Counsel
973.646.3292

Photo of Douglas E. Solomon

Douglas E. Solomon
Partner
973.535.7128

Photo of Leonard S. Spinelli

Leonard S. Spinelli
Counsel
973.230.2085

Photo of Daniel M. Stolz

Daniel M. Stolz
Partner
973.230.2095

Photo of John Suwatson

John Suwatson
Counsel
973.535.4431

Photo of Harvey Weissbard

Harvey Weissbard
Of Counsel
973.230.2084

Photo of Yostina Mishriky

Yostina Mishriky
Associate
973.230.2072



Practices:



General Search Results:

  • 06.16.2022

    It’s Settled . . . Or Is It? NJ Appellate Division Rules The NJLAD Does Not Prohibit Non-Disparagement Clauses in Settlement Agreements
    On May 31, 2022, in Savage v. Township of Neptune, the New Jersey Appellate Division partially upheld, and partially overturned, a trial court’s enforcement of a private settlement agreement, holding that although the settlement agreement’s non-disparagement clause was enforceable and not violative of the statutory prohibition against enforcing non-disclosure provisions in harassment/discrimination/retaliation cases, the employee’s allegedly disparaging statements did not actually violate the non-disparagement clause as written.

  • 05.31.2022

    Is There a Problem Officer?: NJ Appellate Division Affirms Dismissal of Retired Police Officer’s Disability Lawsuit
    On May 23, 2022, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld a trial court’s dismissal of failure to promote, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims brought by a retired New Jersey State Police Trooper. In Stonnell v. State of New Jersey, the Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the trooper’s New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) claims, finding that he failed to set forth facts sufficient to establish that the New Jersey State Police violated the law with respect to his employment.

  • 05.26.2022

    Digital Walls Surrounding Speech on Social Media Crumble: NJ Appellate Division Upholds Employee Termination for Racist Facebook Posts
    On May 20, 2022, in McVey v AtlantiCare Medical System, the New Jersey Appellate Division Panel affirmed the dismissal of an employee’s case holding that her termination was not in violation of the protections afforded to speech. After losing her job for posting racist comments on social media, Plaintiff, Heather J. McVey, learned that freedom of speech, like all rights, is not absolute.

  • 02.25.2022

    To Be Blunt: The NJLAD Does Not Bar Arbitration of Medical Marijuana User’s Employment Claims
    On February 15, 2022, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld a trial court Order compelling arbitration of discrimination and wrongful termination claims brought by a former employee who was terminated for testing positive for marijuana. In a matter of first impression, the Appellate Division in Antonucci v. Curvature Newco, Inc. held that federal law governing arbitration preempts a 2019 amendment to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) invalidating employment agreements that require employees to waive certain rights, with respect to discrimination, retaliation, and/or harassment claims.

  • 02.23.2022

    Vaccination or (Possibly) Termination: Appellate Division Affirms NJ Executive Order 283
    The Appellate Division upholds Governor Murphy’s Executive Order 283, one of the most recent COVID-19 mandates requiring full vaccination (without the alternative option for testing) for covered workers in healthcare and high-risk congregate facilities.

  • 01.18.2022

    Whose Burden is it Anyway? NJ Appellate Division Holds Employee Fails to Meet the Burden of Persuasion of Showing Discriminatory Intent
    Despite surviving summary judgment, securing a favorable verdict at the second trial, and being awarded counsel fees, Plaintiff’s gender discrimination case was abruptly dismissed by the Appellate Division. On January 3, 2022, the three-judge panel held that an employee in a discrimination case bears the burden of persuasion at all stages. This employee’s argument fell short of that burden, and her case was, therefore, dismissed.

  • 08.25.2021

    Everyone’s Out of Bounds! NJ District Court Finds Employer’s Discretion in Managing Suspected FMLA Abuse is Limited by the Employer’s Lack of Proper Documentation
    On August 6, 2021, the New Jersey District Court in Calio v. Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders, denied motions by both an employer and an employee to resolve a dispute over abuse of leave under the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA) rights. The District Court ruled that it could not dispose of the case in its early stages and could not find that the employer properly disciplined the employee for excessive absences, due in part, to the employer’s lack of proper documentation.

  • 08.20.2021

    The Best Lawyers in America® Names Genova Burns Attorneys to 2022 Listing
    Genova Burns is pleased to announce that six of the firm's attorneys have been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 (a trademark of Woodward/White, Inc.).

  • 07.06.2021

    NJ Supreme Court Issues A Grim Prognosis For Employers Facing Hostile Work Environment Claims
    After losing in both the trial and appellate courts, Armando Rios, Jr., an ex-Pharmaceutical Executive, managed to sway the minds of the Justices on the State’s highest court to revive his hostile work environment claim. Rios claimed his direct supervisor twice referred to Hispanics by a racial epithet thereby creating a hostile work environment. The lower courts held that two incidents are not severe or pervasive enough to constitute a hostile work environment and dismissed his case. A unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court, however, disagreed and reversed the lower court decisions.

  • 06.24.2021

    NJ District Court Gives Employers Hope in the Fight Against FMLA Misuse
    On May 28, 2021, the U.S. District for New Jersey in VanHook v. Cooper Health Systems, granted Cooper’s summary judgment against its employee’s discrimination and retaliation claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The District Court agreed with the employer that the record confirms the employee’s abusive and dishonest actions and granted the employer’s motion of summary judgment.

  • 06.22.2021

    NJ Supreme Court Strikes Adverse Employment Action Requirement in Failure to Accommodate Claims
    On June 8, 2021, the New Jersey Supreme Court in Richter v. Oakland Board of Education affirmed the Appellate Division’s ruling that an employee asserting a failure to accommodate claim does not have to separately establish that she suffered an adverse employment action in addition to demonstrating her employer’s inaction in failing to reasonably accommodate her disability.

  • 05.24.2021

    NJ Appellate Narrows the Road in Auto Dealership’s Sexual Harassment Case
    On May 18, 2021, in McBride v. Atlantic Chrysler Jeep, the New Jersey Appellate Division revived a Sales Consultant’s hostile work environment case against a car dealership after the Law Division previously dismissed it in the dealership’s favor. The employee claimed that she was terminated for rejecting her supervisor’s sexual advances and alleged the dealership was vicariously liable for the supervisor’s conduct. The trial court granted the dealership’s motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the Appellate Division overturned the trial court’s decision and sent the case back to the Law Division to proceed to trial.

  • 05.20.2021

    Genova Burns LLC Recognized as Among the World's Best in Labor & Employment Law by Chambers USA Ranking
    Chairman & Managing Partner Angelo J. Genova and Partner John C. Petrella have both been recognized again by Chambers USA as some of the best in the world in the field of Labor and Employment Law.

  • 05.20.2021

    The Devil is in the Details: NJ District Court Demands Details of Sexual Harassment to Defeat Motion to Dismiss
    On April 12, 2021, the New Jersey District Court for the District of New Jersey in Spence v. New Jersey, et al., granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss an employee’s sexual harassment and retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). The employee claimed she was sexually harassed by her co-worker and that her supervisors took retaliatory action against her for reporting the alleged sexual harassment. The District Court found that the employee failed to sufficiently plead her sexual harassment claim for lack of pervasive harassment, and in part failed to sufficiently plead her retaliation claim for lack of temporal proximity.

  • 04.12.2021

    Doubling Down on the FAA: NJ District Court Strikes Down the NJLAD’s Prohibition Against Arbitration
    Earlier this year, in a matter of first impression, the Monmouth County Law Division in Janco v. Bay Ridge Automotive Management Corp. held that the amendment to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) which prohibits a waiver of any right or remedy available under the NJLAD was superseded by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In its decision on March 25, 2021 in New Jersey Civil Justice Institute v. Grewal, the United States District Court followed suit and enjoined the State AG from enforcing Section 12.7 of the NJLAD that would invalidate arbitration agreements between employers and employees. This decision represents a significant victory for employers on the enforceability of arbitration agreements in harassment, discrimination and retaliation cases in New Jersey.

  • 03.29.2021

    Cause & Effect: NJ Appellate Division Rules Correlation Does Not Imply Causation in Disability Discrimination Suit
    On March 4, 2021, the New Jersey Appellate Division in Kalim v. Urban Outfitters, Inc. affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a former employee’s wrongful termination, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD).

  • 03.19.2021

    Let’s Go to the Video Tape: NJ Appellate Division Rules Video Dooms Nurse’s Age Discrimination Case
    On March 3, 2021, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld the dismissal of a 49-year old Nurse’s age discrimination case against St. Peter’s University Hospital. The Nurse, who was fired after using force to restrain a hospital patient, claimed the incident with the patient was merely a pretext for age discrimination, even though the surveillance video demonstrated otherwise.

  • 03.08.2021

    FAA Trumps NJLAD: NJ Superior Court Upholds Employer’s Arbitration Agreement in NJLAD Case
    In a matter of first impression, the Monmouth County Law Division in Janco v. Bay Ridge Automotive Management Corp., found that a former employee’s claims brought under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination were subject to the arbitration agreement that she signed when she was first hired. The Court further held that the recent amendment to the Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) which prohibits a waiver of any right or remedy available under the NJLAD was superseded by the Federal Arbitration Act.

  • 01.22.2021

    2020: The Year of the Mole? New Jersey Appellate Division Grants Employee A Second Chance to Pursue Whistleblower Claim
    In the final throws of 2020, a former Rutgers employee was granted a second chance to pursue her whistleblower claim. On December 29, 2020, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, in Debra Herbe v. Rutgers University, reversed a Superior Court’s grant of summary judgment for Rutgers University in a lawsuit brought by a former employee who alleged that the University fired her in retaliation for lodging a complaint against her supervisor. In the new year, the former employee will get another chance to pursue her claim against the University.

  • 12.07.2020

    A Forklift Operator Walks into a Bar
    On August 7, 2020, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld the trial court’s dismissal of a negligence action filed by a leased warehouse worker against his employer for injuries sustained while on duty.

Load More