
John G. Geppert, Jr.
Partner
201-896-7097 jgeppert@sh-law.comClient Alert
Author: John G. Geppert, Jr.
Date: October 6, 2023
Partner
201-896-7097 jgeppert@sh-law.comJohn Geppert and Sarah Gober were recently successful in securing a favorable precedent-setting decision before the New Jersey Appellate Division. The Appellate Division confirmed the decision of the Commissioner of Education, finding that the Hackensack Board of Education had properly responded yes to questions on a “Pass the Trash” disclosure form regarding a former employee’s resignation amidst allegations of sexual misconduct. The court also agreed with the Commissioner of Education’s conclusion that the Board was entitled to absolute immunity with regard to its responses to the form so long as the responses were made in good faith.
In one of the first decisions following enactment of the “Pass the Trash” statute, the case stemmed from notice provided to the Board in 2013, claiming that the employee had posted inappropriate and sexually suggestive content to her social media page, which was available to students. As the District conducted an investigation into the allegations, which included contacting law enforcement, the parties agreed to the terms of a settlement agreement providing for the employee’s resignation. In 2019, the Board received and responded to a “Sexual Misconduct/Child Abuse Disclosure Information Request” which was submitted by A.B.’s prospective employer pursuant to the “Pass the Trash” requirements, enacted after A.B.’s separation from employment with the Board. The Board responded affirmatively to the questions regarding whether A.B. had been the subject of any child abuse or sexual misconduct investigation, and whether she resigned or was otherwise separated while “allegations” were under investigation. The prospective employer elected not to move forward with A.B.’s employment.
A.B. subsequently filed a complaint against the Board. However, the administrative law judge granted summary decision in favor of the Board. The Commissioner of Education adopted the ALJ’s decision and A.B. appealed. The Appellate Division upheld the Commissioner of Education’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Board, affirming the Commissioner’s conclusions. The court found that the Board had acted in compliance with its obligations under “Pass the Trash” by affirmatively responding to the questions of whether the employee had been subject to an investigation into sexual misconduct and that she resigned while those allegations were under investigation. The court concluded that the execution of a settlement agreement requiring her resignation did not support A.B.’s arguments that she was no longer under investigation at the time of her resignation, that her behavior was not sexual misconduct, and that the Board had not acted in good faith when responding to the form.
Please feel free to contact John Geppert, if you have any questions at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
FinCEN Beneficial Owner Reporting Must be Completed by January 13 for pre-2024 Companies On December 23, 2024, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the injunction that stayed the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act put into place by a federal judge in Texas. The result is that if you are required to file a […]
Author: Scott H. Novak
IMPORTANT UPDATE! FinCEN Corporate Transparency Act filings shut down by the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), entities that were in existence before January 1, 2024 are required to file Beneficial Owner Reports (BOR) with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) before January 1, 2025. Requirements […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
On September 12, 2024, Gov. Phil Murphy signed controversial legislation that will dramatically alter New Jersey’s cannabis, hemp, and liquor industries. The new law aims to regulate the influx of intoxicating hemp products into the marketplace by bringing them under the purview of the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission (CRC). That means that edibles, THC-infused beverages, […]
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
On May 16, 2024, President Joe Biden announced that his administration is committed to reclassifying cannabis. Shortly thereafter, Attorney General Merritt Garland initiated the formal rulemaking process to move cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). “This is monumental,” President Biden said in a video statement […]
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to take significant action regarding the regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS. On April 19, 2024, the EPA released its Final Rule designating PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), which will allow EPA to use the […]
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
Parties involved in a civil enforcement matter by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could soon find themselves facing even more serious criminal liability. On April 17, 2024, the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance announced a new “Strategic Civil-Criminal Enforcement Policy” (Policy). The Policy is effective immediately and applies to all civil and […]
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
John Geppert and Sarah Gober were recently successful in securing a favorable precedent-setting decision before the New Jersey Appellate Division. The Appellate Division confirmed the decision of the Commissioner of Education, finding that the Hackensack Board of Education had properly responded yes to questions on a “Pass the Trash” disclosure form regarding a former employee’s resignation amidst allegations of sexual misconduct. The court also agreed with the Commissioner of Education’s conclusion that the Board was entitled to absolute immunity with regard to its responses to the form so long as the responses were made in good faith.
In one of the first decisions following enactment of the “Pass the Trash” statute, the case stemmed from notice provided to the Board in 2013, claiming that the employee had posted inappropriate and sexually suggestive content to her social media page, which was available to students. As the District conducted an investigation into the allegations, which included contacting law enforcement, the parties agreed to the terms of a settlement agreement providing for the employee’s resignation. In 2019, the Board received and responded to a “Sexual Misconduct/Child Abuse Disclosure Information Request” which was submitted by A.B.’s prospective employer pursuant to the “Pass the Trash” requirements, enacted after A.B.’s separation from employment with the Board. The Board responded affirmatively to the questions regarding whether A.B. had been the subject of any child abuse or sexual misconduct investigation, and whether she resigned or was otherwise separated while “allegations” were under investigation. The prospective employer elected not to move forward with A.B.’s employment.
A.B. subsequently filed a complaint against the Board. However, the administrative law judge granted summary decision in favor of the Board. The Commissioner of Education adopted the ALJ’s decision and A.B. appealed. The Appellate Division upheld the Commissioner of Education’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Board, affirming the Commissioner’s conclusions. The court found that the Board had acted in compliance with its obligations under “Pass the Trash” by affirmatively responding to the questions of whether the employee had been subject to an investigation into sexual misconduct and that she resigned while those allegations were under investigation. The court concluded that the execution of a settlement agreement requiring her resignation did not support A.B.’s arguments that she was no longer under investigation at the time of her resignation, that her behavior was not sexual misconduct, and that the Board had not acted in good faith when responding to the form.
Please feel free to contact John Geppert, if you have any questions at 201-896-4100.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!