Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: February 26, 2015
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comAs with many workplace issues, the first step is to create an employee policy that outlines the rules for accessing the Internet and details the potential consequences for violating those guidelines. At minimum, an Internet Usage Policy should make it clear that employees are expected to use the Internet exclusively for job-related activities and that personal use is not permitted. In addition, it is imperative to expressly state that the company reserves the right monitoring employees Internet activity that takes place on employer-owned devices, including the data that is composed, sent or received through its online connections.
In a recent New Jersey employment law decision, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court confirmed that employers have the right to monitor a worker’s Internet activity if they suspect abuse. In Liebeskind v Rutgers University, the plaintiff filed an invasion of privacy claim after his supervisors reviewed his browsing history to determine if he was spending an inordinate amount of time on non-work- related matters.
In its opinion, the court noted that Rutgers University had an “Acceptable Use Policy for Computing and Information Technology Resources” in effect at the time of plaintiff’s employment. It stated that employees’ privacy “may be superseded by the University’s requirement to protect the integrity of information technology resources, the rights of all users and the property of the University.” Rutgers further “reserve[d] the right to examine material stored on or transmitted through its facilities” where there was reason to believe that an employee was using workplace computing facilities in an improper way.
In dismissing the claim, the appeals court relied on Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., in which the New Jersey Supreme Court held that employers can monitor and regulate the use of workplace computers because they have a legitimate interest to protect their assets, reputation, and business productivity.
Applying this precedent, the Appellate Division concluded that the university had a legitimate interest in monitoring and regulating plaintiff’s workplace computer and had a policy informing employees that it reserved the right to monitor Internet activity to determine improper use. The court also emphasized that the plaintiff did not provide any evidence that Rutgers University had attempted to access the content of personal, password-protected emails or personal accounts.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
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.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!