Employment Discrimination
Carol Tarr v. Bob Ciasulli
This matter was a hostile work environment and sexual harassment action which was brought under New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. The New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in this matter allows for plaintiff’s to obtain compensation for mental anguish and embarrassment when there is an underlying actionable claim. Expert testimony, evidentiary threshold and liability issues in employment discrimination claims were all addressed by the Supreme Court in this decision.
Reader interactions
5 Replies to “Employment Discrimination”
Comments are closed.
On Monday, August 9, 2004, the New Jersey Supreme Court released an extremely important decision which will effect the way employment discrimination claims are litigated in the Garden State. The case, Tarr v. Ciasulli, is extremely important to employees and employers for three reasons. First, it lowered the evidentiary threshold that a Plaintiff must prove in order to recover emotional distress damages. This means that a plaintiff will no longer need an expert to recover emotional damages caused by unlawful discrimination. Second, for the first time the New Jersey Supreme Court defined and set forth a test for holding an “aider or abettor” to the employment discrimination personally liable for violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Finally, the Tarr decision defined when a Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs as a “prevailing party.”
The New Jersey Supreme Court held that expert testimony is no longer required to prove “emotional distress” damages. Prior to Tarr, a Plaintiff seeking to recover “emotional distress” damages generally needed to retain an expert who would provide opinion testimony linking a physical manifestation of a psychological injury to the discrimination. Additionally, an expert would be required to review the Plaintiff’s medical and psychological records and conclude that he or she suffered a physical manifestation as a result of discrimination. All that is now needed is testimony by the Plaintiff stating that they were embarrassed or humiliated as a result of the alleged unlawful conduct.
Finally, the Tarr Court held that if a Plaintiff receives any award even a small or nominal award he/she is entitled to counsel fees and costs.
In the wake of this important decision, businesses must take affirmative steps to ensure a discrimination free work-place. It is essential that businesses communicate that discrimination is not tolerated in the workplace and advise workers (during the course of regular in-house seminars and in the business’s Employment Manual) where to go if they have witnessed or been a victim of discrimination.
Do you happen to know who were the founders of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination?
In 1945, Chapter 169-A321 Created the Division Against Employment Discrimination. The enactment was introduced by Assemblyman Hill on March 12th, Amended in the Senate April 6th and then approved on April 16th.
Assemblymen Hill was also very active in other enactments to this legislation including the forbidding of discrimination in public contracts, schools, hospitals and war industries.
In 1948, the first of the Freeman Bills to amend the Discrimination Act of 1945 and to enlarge its scope was enacted. The first Freeman Bill was intended to combine, in one law the substantive provisions of the existing Civil Rights Law and the existing Law Against Discrimination. The bill had many supporters including:
Legislative Committee
N.J. State Conference of NAACP Branches
N.J. State Council
American Veterans’ Committee
American for Democratic Action
League of Women Voters on N.J.
N.J. State CIO Council
NJEA
American Jewish Congress
Urban League of N.J.
N.J. Independent Citizens League
League of Women Shoppers
Jewish War Veterans
UEW, D4, CIO
Greater Newark CIO Council
North Jersey Council B’nai B’rith, Women
North Jersey Civil Liberties League
Newark Teachers Union
However, this bill (A152), besides its support in the Assembly and by strong groups in the state, died in the Senate.
In 1949, the second Freeman Bill was introduced, and was substantially similar to the first. It was introduced on january 17, 1949; passed the Assembly on February 7 with minor amendments; amended again in the Senate of March 14 and on March 16 those amendments were passed in the Assembly.
It could be argued that the two founders of the LAD which we know today would be Hill and Freeman.
Thank you for your question. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions.
Regarding the 1945 Chapter 169-A321, Assemblyman Hill. Please email me any additional information/comments pertaining to Assemblyman Hill. Thank you.
I am an African American Male, I have worked at my current firm for over 6 years. My firm is a Information Technology Networking Services firm. As an engineer, I am assignmed projetcs at various companies or clients of the company I work for. I began at a low salary for my position around $50,000 in 1999. My firm bases everything on the amount of hours an engineer bills. During my last 6 years I have consitently billed with the exception of a 30 day period also vacation and limited sick days. I returned to school and recieved a major and minor applicable to my work enviornment. Althoguh I received a raise in my 2nd year bringing me to $72,000 a year. My colleages were receiving salarys above $90,000. I was informed by my immediate manager last year that I was indeed making the lowest salary for my position in the company. I have received good reviews, great reviews from my clients, yet I have not received a raise to be brought up to the status quo in salary. I would like to know if someone can help me or advise me in this matter.