Civil Court Rules and Jury Charges

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

Friday, December 26, 2014

2.11 WRONGFUL DISCHARGE IN VIOLATION OF A CLEAR MANDATE OF PUBLIC POLICY model jury charge

2.11            WRONGFUL DISCHARGE IN VIOLATION OF A CLEAR MANDATE OF PUBLIC POLICY[1]  (Approved 3/91; Revised 7/10)

         Plaintiff has alleged that he/she was wrongfully discharged from his/her position in violation of public policy. I charge you that the policy of ________________ is a clear mandate of public policy2; you must decide whether plaintiff was discharged:
                                [choose appropriate option below:]
         (1)     in violation of that policy; or

         (2)     for exercising rights protected by that policy; or

         (3)     for declining to perform an act or acts which require a violation of that policy;

         [or] whether, as defendant states, plaintiff was not discharged for a reason related to that policy.

[choose appropriate corresponding option below:]
         (1)     In order to establish that plaintiff was discharged in violation of a public policy, you must find by a preponderance of the evidence that plaintiff’s discharge violated the [state the public policy].  If plaintiff does not prove this, you need not consider whether plaintiff’s discharge was wrongful.  If plaintiff does prove that his/her discharge violated the [public policy], then you must consider whether3 a determinative factor for his/her discharge was a violation of the [public policy], and not some other reason such as _______________________, which defendant has asserted.
         (2 or 3)       In order to establish that plaintiff was discharged for exercising rights under [public policy] or for declining to perform an act or acts which require a violation of the [public policy], you must find that plaintiff has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he/she:
         b.      brought the alleged violation of the [state the public policy] to the attention of an appropriate governmental outside authority or took other action reasonably calculated to prevent the objectionable conduct.5


[charge the following in every case]
         It is the plaintiff’s obligation to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his/her [describe the alleged adverse action in question, such as demotion, firing, etc.] violated a clear mandate of public policy.7, 8  In this regard, I remind you that plaintiff was a so-called “at will” employee, that is he/she did not have a contract of employment.  In New Jersey, such an employee can be discharged at the wish of the employer for any reason or for no reason.  He/she could be discharged for a false cause, or for no cause at all, provided only that the reason the employer discharged the employee did not violate any clear mandate of public policy.  A person fired unfairly, but not fired in violation of a specific public policy, does not have a cause of action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy.



    1 This charge is to be given only if a claim is asserted under Pierce v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 84 N.J. 58 (1980). 
     2 Whether there is a clear mandate of public policy prohibiting the conduct is a question for the trial judge.  Warthen v. Toms River Community Hospital, 199 N.J. Super. 18, 25 (App. Div. 1985).
     3 Erickson v. Marsh & McLennan, 117 N.J. 539, 560, 561 (1990).  This seems tautological, but that is what the opinion says.
    4 Pierce v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., supra, at 72. 
   5 Tartaglia v. UBS PaineWebber Inc., 197 N.J. 81, 111 (2008).
   6 Tartaglia v. UBS PaineWebber Inc., supra, at 109.
   7 Tartaglia v. UBS PaineWebber Inc., supra, at 112.
   8 Although the New Jersey Supreme Court and Appellate Division have held that plaintiffs bringing claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA), and New Jersey Family Leave Act (FLA) need only prove that the unlawful motive was a determinative factor in the adverse employment decision rather than the sole motivating factor, see, e.g., Bergen Commercial Bank v. Sisler, 157 N.J. 188, 207 (1999) (so holding with regard to LAD), Donofry v. Autotote Systems, Inc., 350 N.J. Super. 276, 293 (App. Div. 2001) (so holding with regard to CEPA), and DePalma v. Building Inspection Underwriters, 350 N.J. Super. 195, 214 (App. Div. 2002) (so holding with regard to FLA), no reported New Jersey state or federal court decisions appear to have addressed that issue with regard to New Jersey common-law wrongful discharge claims.

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

2B:1-7 Adoption of Rules of Court.

2B:1-7  Adoption of Rules of Court.

12. a. The Supreme Court, subject to the limitations set forth in subsection b. of this section, may adopt Rules of Court to revise or supplement filing fees and other statutory fees payable to the court for the sole purpose of funding:

(1)the development, maintenance and administration of a Statewide Pretrial Services Program;

(2)the development, maintenance and administration of a Statewide digital e-court information system; and

(3)the provision to the poor of legal assistance in civil matters by Legal Services of New Jersey and its affiliates.

b.All existing filing fees and other statutory fees payable to the court on the effective date of this section shall not be increased or supplemented more than $50 in the aggregate for each fee beginning on the effective date of this section.

c.As used in sections 12 through 19 of P.L.2014, c.31 (C.2B:1-7 through C.2B:1-13):

"Digital e-court information system" shall mean a Statewide integrated system that includes but is not limited to electronic filing, electronic service of process, electronic document management, electronic case management, electronic financial management, and public access to digital court records; and

"Pretrial Services Program" shall mean the pretrial services program established pursuant to section 11 of P.L.2014, c.31 (C.2A:162-25).

L.2014, c.31, s.12.
 
2B:1-8  Public announcement of rules, delivery of copies.
13.The rules proposed pursuant to section 12 of P.L.2014, c.31 (C.2B:1-7) shall be publicly announced by the Supreme Court. On the same day on which the rule or rules are publicly announced, the Supreme Court shall deliver true copies to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the General Assembly, and the Governor. The Supreme Court shall provide the public with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed rule or rules.  The rule or rules shall take effect on the date provided by the Supreme Court.

L.2014, c.31, s.13.
 
2B:1-9  "21st Century Improvement Fund." 
14. a. There is established in the General Fund a dedicated, non-lapsing fund to be known as the "21st Century Justice Improvement Fund," which shall be credited annually with a sum equal to the revenue to be derived annually from the incremental amount of any filing fees or other statutory fees payable to the court that are revised or supplemented pursuant to sections 12 and 13 of P.L.2014, c.31 (C.2B:1-7 and C.2B:1-8) and the related fee revisions as provided by operation of N.J.S.22A:2-5 and section 2 of P.L.1993, c.74 (C.22A:5-1).  The fund shall be administered by the State Treasurer.  Interest and other income earned on monies in the fund shall be credited to the fund.  Monies credited to the fund shall be appropriated annually and used exclusively for the purposes of funding:

(1)the development, maintenance and administration of a Statewide Pretrial Services Program;

(2) the development, maintenance and administration of a Statewide digital e-court information system; and

(3)the provision to the poor of legal assistance in civil matters by Legal Services of New Jersey and its affiliates.

b.Any amount remaining in the fund after the appropriation of funds as provided in paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) of subsection a. of this section shall be retained by the Judiciary for the purpose of developing, maintaining and administering the Pretrial Services Program or for court information technology.  The monies credited to the fund shall not be used for any purpose other than those purposes set forth in this section and section 15 of P.L.2014, c.31 (C.2B:1-10).

L.2014, c.31, s.14. 

Revised 2014 NJ Court filing fees

Rule 1:43. FILING AND OTHER FEES ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO N.J.S.A. 2B:1-7
THE FOLLOWING FILING FEES AND OTHER FEES PAYABLE TO THE COURT, REVISED AND SUPPLEMENTED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH N.J.S.A. 2B:1-7, ARE ESTABLISHED EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 17, 2014. ALL OTHER FILING FEES OR OTHER FEES NOT HERE LISTED ARE UNCHANGED BY THE PROCESS SET FORTH IN N.J.S.A. 2B:1-7.


SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, CIVIL PAR

FEE SUBJECT
FEE


COMPLAINT
$250.00


FILING OF FIRST PAPER BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE PLAINTIFF
$175.00


MOTION
$50.00


COMPLAINT IN MULTICOUNTY LITIGATION
$250.00


ANSWER IN MULTICOUNTY LITIGATION
$175.00


MOTION IN MULTICOUNTY LITIGATION
$50.00


CIVIL LAW WRITS
$50.00


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
$50.00


ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT (NOT AN ALLOWABLE TAXED COST)
$35.00


WARRANT TO SATISFY JUDGMENT (NOT AN ALLOWABLE TAXED COST)
$50.00


WAGE GARNISHMENT
$35.00


WARRANT FOR ARREST
$35.00




SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, SPECIAL CIVIL PART

SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, CHANCERY PART GENERAL EQUITY
FEE SUBJECT
FEE



FILING COMPLAINT
$250.00



FILING ANSWER
$175.00



ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (GENERAL EQUITY AND FORECLOSURE)
$50.00



FILING MOTION
$50.00



FORECLOSURE COMPLAINT
$250.00



FORECLOSURE ANSWER
$175.00



FORECLOSURE MOTION
$50.00



FORECLOSURE WRITS
$50.00
- - -


FORECLOSURE ASSIGNMENTS
$35.00





SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, CHANCERY PART FAMILY
FEE SUBJECT
FEE



FILING DIVORCE COMPLAINT (ALL TYPES)
$300.00
$275.00 TO COURT



FILING FIRST RESPONSIVE PLEADING IN DISSOLUTION MATTER     
$175.00



MOTIONS IN DISSOLUTION MATTERS
$50.00



ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (DISSOLUTION ONLY)
$50.00



POST-DISPOSITION APPLICATION/MOTION IN NON-DISSOLUTION MATTERS
$25.00
- - -




SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, CRIMINAL PART
FEE SUBJECT
FEE



EXPUNGEMENT APPLICATION
$75.00



PERMIT TO CARRY HANDGUN
$50.00



MUNICIPAL COURT APPEAL
$100.00



APPEAL OF DENIAL OF PERMIT TO PURCHASE HANDGUN OR FIREARMS PURCHASER ID CARD
$50.00
- - -


BAIL/POST/DISCHARGE
$50.00





SUPERIOR COURT, PROBATION DIVISION

FEE SUBJECT
FEE
AUTHORITY


PROBATION OUT-OF-STATE SUPERVISION FEE (PROBATIONER TRANSFERRED TO NJ FROM ANOTHER STATE/JURISDICTION FOR SUPERVISION IN NJ)
$25.00 PER MONTH
INTERSTATE COMPACT FOR ADULT OFFENDER SUPERVISION (ICAOS), RULE 4.107(B)(1)





















ALL STATE COURTS
FEE SUBJECT
FEE
AUTHORITY


AFFIXING COURT SEAL
$10.00



EXEMPLIFICATION
$50.00



CERTIFIED COPY OF ANY DOCUMENT
$15.00



NON-PARTY NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FEE (EXCEPT FOR SPECIAL CIVIL PART)
$50.00



RECORDING INSTRUMENTS NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
$35.00
N.J.S.A. 22A:2-7

















SUPREME COURT
FEE SUBJECT
FEE



NOTICE OF APPEAL OR CROSS APPEAL;
PETITION AND CROSS PETITION
FOR CERTIFICATION OR REVIEW
$250.00



FIRST PAPER FILED IF NOT IN A PENDING CASE OR IF MADE AFTER JUDGMENT ENTERED
$50.00























SUPERIOR COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION
FEE SUBJECT
FEE



NOTICE OF APPEAL OR CROSS APPEAL
$250.00



FIRST PAPER FILED IF NOT IN A PENDING CASE OR IF MADE AFTER JUDGMENT ENTERED
$50.00