CEPA waiver provision does not bar a race discrimination claim that is “substantially independent” from the retaliatory discharge claim.

The plaintiff, the former director of Legal and Governmental Affairs, sued her former employer under both CEPA and the NJLAD. The trial court dismissed the NJLAD claim based upon the finding that it was barred by the waiver provision of CEPA. While affirming the dismissal, the Appellate Division held that the trial court’s reasoning was flawed and that the waiver provision was not applicable to the discrimination claim brought under the NJLAD since it was “substantially independent” of the CEPA claim and, therefore, not swept within the terms of the waiver requirement. The waiver provision did not apply since the proofs associated with the NJLAD claim were different than those associated with the CEPA claim.

_{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2016}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}