Articles Posted in Civil Service Law

Published on:

by

An appellate court recently issued two opinions in appeals from the New Jersey Civil Service Commission regarding the termination of three police officers sought by the Jersey City Police Department because the officers were positive for marijuana use in urinalysis tests.  In the decisions, the court set a line between when termination is allowed and when prohibited under New Jersey’s regulation of marijuana use.joe-b-300x200

Three Positive Urinalysis Tests

The three officers, Norhan Mansour, Omar Polanco and Montavious Patten, all had positive results for marijuana from urinalysis tests.  In subsequent interviews with Jersey City Police Department Internal Affairs investigators, they admitted the use.  Officers Mansour said that he had purchased the marijuana at a legal dispensary and produced receipts.  Officer Polanco also stated that he had purchased the marijuana at a legal dispensary but did not have receipts.  Officer Patten purchased the marijuana from a friend named “Sal,” who told Patten that he had purchased it from a legal dispensary.  There was no allegation that the officers were under the influence of marijuana on the job.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey Civil Service List Removal Appeals

Under New Jersey civil service law, employment decisions, including hiring, must be based solely on merit.  The civil service system therefore employs examinations which objectively test a candidate’s fitness.  Successful candidates are then placed on a hiring list in order of their scores, with certain preferences for veterans.  New employees must then be hired off the list in order of their placement, subject to the Rule of Three.  Candidates for positions as law enforcement officers or fire fighters includes testing of their psychological fitness.  A candidate may be removed from7-300x225 a hiring list for failure of these examinations.

However, because New Jersey’s civil service laws are designed to ensure that employment decisions are based on merit and not because of favoritism, nepotism or discrimination, there is a robust due process procedure for list removal appeals.   The candidate first appeals his removal from the list with the New Jersey Civil Service Commission.  Thereafter, the unsuccessful party may appeal an unfavorable decision to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court, and then ultimately to the New Jersey Supreme Court (which only hears a small, select number of appeals).

Continue reading
Published on:

by

McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC is pleased to announce that Maurice McLaughlin was named to the “Top 100: New Jersey Super Lawyers” list in the 2026 edition of New Jersey Super Lawyers*.  Maurice has been included on the Super Lawyers list since 2012 before being named to the Top 100 list this year.  In addition, Pauline Young was included on the New Jersey Super Lawyers list from 2020-2025.law-firm-2-300x184

Super Lawyers’ selection criteria is as follows.  “Super Lawyers selects attorneys using a patented multiphase selection process. Peer nominations and evaluations are combined with independent research. Each candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement. Selections are made on an annual, state-by-state basis. The objective is to create a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and consumers searching for legal counsel. Since Super Lawyers is intended to be used as an aid in selecting a lawyer, we limit the lawyer ratings to those who can be hired and retained by the public… The final published list represents the top 5 percent of lawyers in the state. The lists are published annually in state and regional editions of Super Lawyers magazines and in inserts and special advertising sections in leading city and regional magazines and newspapers. All attorneys selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers, regardless of year, can be found on SuperLawyers.com.”

Maurice, with Frank Nardi, founded the law firm in 2002, and practices in employment, commercial and construction litigation.  He is also a mediator appointed by the Superior Court to mediate civil litigation.  Maurice is the author of the book New Jersey Public Employment Law published by Gann Law Books, now in its 14th edition.  Maurice is admitted to the state bars in New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts, and the United States Supreme Court.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

Background: Anti-Discrimination Statutes and the Background Circumstances Rule

Title VII of the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination both prohibit employers from illegally discriminating against their employees.  Normally the evaluation is straightforward under the McDonnell Douglas Test.  However, in the case of reverse discrimination, i.e., where an employer is accused of discriminating against an employee who is in the majority, New Jersey andpaterson-pd-john-and-andrew-300x183 many Federal courts imposed a higher burden of proof on the employee.  In cases of reverse discrimination, employees in New Jersey state courts and many federal courts had to satisfy the “Background Circumstances Rule,” which requires that the employee prove that he “has been victimized by the unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”  However, in 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously struck down the Background Circumstances Rule in Title VII cases in the case of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services.

The U.S. Supreme Court Steps In

Continue reading
Published on:

by

The New Jersey Appellate Division examined a town’s termination of payments to its former employee under a separation agreement when the employee became employed by another town.

Background4-225x300

Alberto Cabrera was the municipal clerk of the Town of Guttenberg, New Jersey.  As so often happens, the parties wished to terminate their relationship.  They entered into a Separation Agreement which provided that Cabrera would stop performing his duties and go on paid leave beginning on August 18, 2022, and the leave would terminate with his retirement on March 31, 2023.  He would be on the payroll and paid his regular salary by the Town through that day.  He would continue to get medical benefits through March 31, 2023.  The Town would also pay him his accrued but unused vacation, sick, compensatory and personal days for 2022 and 2023.  Cabrera agreed to submit a letter requesting this paid leave of absence, which he did the same day.  The Town’s Mayor and Council voted to approve the agreement.  Cabrera inquired about amending the agreement once, but it was never changed in any way.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act

The New Jersey Arbitration Act and Federal Arbitration Act generally require enforcement of agreements to arbitrate disputes.  This extends to the enforcement of arbitration agreements in employment contracts.

However, in response to the #MeToo Movement, Congress passed the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021.  The EFAA provided:new-york-county-courthouse-1540991328RMS-300x200

Continue reading
Published on:

by

A New Jersey employment law decision recently examined the effect of a conviction under the newly enacted New Jersey Police Training Act and with the New Jersey Police Training Commission in the case of Garcia vs. New Jersey Police Training Commission. 

paterson-pd-andrew-300x211

Background

Gregory Gacia was a police officer with the Wharton, New Jersey, Police Department.  As a result of a search of his residence, he was charged with false representations and gun possession offenses.  Thereafter, on November 14, 2022, he entered into a plea agreement whereby he pled guilty to one count of possessing a large capacity ammunition magazine in the fourth degree.  He was sentenced to one year of probation, with the judgment of conviction entered on January 13, 2023.  Garcia appealed his decision to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, when affirmed his conviction on October 7, 2024.  He thereafter appealed to the Supreme Courts of New Jersey and the United States, both of which refused to hear his appeal.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

An appeals court recently issued an opinion in the case of Hand v. Borough of New Providence, examining the rights of New Jersey police officers facing discipline in non-civil service jurisdictions

Backgroundpaterson-pd-john-and-andrew-300x183

The opinion explained that Michael Hand was a corporal with the New Providence Police Department, with thirteen years of service.  On May 17, 2019, he was eating dinner with his wife at a diner during a meal break when a call came for him to respond to a domestic incident.  Another officer, Patrolman Lunch responded.  Plaintiff texted Lynch and his supervisor to see if they needed him but they did not respond, so he did not go.  The supervisor, Sergeant Diamond, who was not called, terminated a traffic stop to respond when he saw on GPS that Hand was not responding.  At the scene, a juvenile experienced a mental health crisis and the situation escalated; Diamond called Hand on the radio and Hand then responded 13 minutes after the original call.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey’s whistleblower law was recently amended to further protect New Jersey private and public sector employees from being forced by their employers to sit through required “captive audience” meetings in an attempt to improperly coerce their employees from exercising their rights.

The Conscientious Employee Protection Actcapt-andrew-209x300

The Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA) is New Jersey’s whistleblower law.  Considered one of the United States’s strongest whistleblower protection laws, it forbids employers from retaliating against their employees for disclosing, objecting to, reporting or refusing to participate in activities which they reasonably believe are illegal, fraudulent, constitute improper patient care, or violate established public policy.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

New Jersey employment law governs the hiring of municipal police officers and firefighters, particularly Titles 11A and 40A of New Jersey Statutes.  These local first responders play critical roles in our society.  New Jersey employment law therefore closely regulates the hiringjoe-b-300x200 process to ensure that New Jersians are served by only the best law enforcement officers and firefighters.

There are two roots for hiring local government law enforcement officers and firefighters.  In civil service jurisdictions, an applicant must pass a civil service examination, score high enough on the list to be reached, pass physical and psychological examinations, pass a background investigation, and successfully complete a police academy course.  Municipalities which have not adopted civil service have more discretion in hiring, in that the applicants do not have to take a civil service examination or be ranked high enough on a civil service hiring list.  However, many non-civil service jurisdictions utilize a “chief’s test” in place of the civil service examination. Civil service municipalities retain some discretion in hiring through the “Rule of Three.”

Initial hires must be at least 18 years of age, but no more than 35, although there are exceptions to the maximum age requirement for veterans and law enforcement officers and firefighters with prior service in another jurisdiction.  They must be New Jersey residents, although recently discharged veterans receive a grace period to move to New Jersey.  A municipality cannot require an applicant to be a resident of the local jurisdiction, but it can give a preference to residents.  residence can also be used as a tie breaker in promotions.  The “veterans preference” is applicable to hiring in civil service municipalities.

Continue reading
Contact Information
37 Vreeland Ave
Totowa, NJ 07512
Phone: (973) 890-0004
Fax: (973) 256-3641

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2026, McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design