Norris, McLaughlin & Marcus

Posts Tagged ‘compensation’

Employee Injured on Commercial Premises May Sue Employer’s Partner Which Leased the Premises

Under the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act, injured workers are assured of relatively swift and certain compensation payments in exchange for relinquishing their rights to pursue a potentially larger recovery in a common law action. This concept is known in legal circles as the “workers’ compensation bar.”  This bar does not, however, preclude an injured employee from suing a third party for negligence that contributed to the accident.

Sometimes questions arise as to whom the workers’ compensation bar will be extended.

Read the rest of this entry »

The New Jersey Supreme Court Requires Municipality to Negotiate With Commercial Tenant Who is Sole Condemnee in Eminent Domain Proceeding

On Wednesday of last week, St. Patrick’s Day, the luck of the Irish was with a commercial tenant who happened to be a defendant in a condemnation action in which the owner’s interest in the property was not being condemned. In Town of Kearny v. Discount City, the New Jersey Supreme Court dismissed a condemnation action filed by the Town of Kearny, because its designated developer, who was also the landlord, failed to engage in bona fide negotiations with the only remaining holdout tenant, even though the lease between the landlord and tenant contained a standard condemnation clause in which it bargained away its right to receive compensation in a taking. Under such circumstances, the Court ruled that the condemning authority has an obligation to engage in bona fide negotiations with the tenant in order to arrive at “just compensation” for the taking of the tenant’s leasehold interest in the property. In doing so, a condemning authority must provide the tenant with appraisals or an explanation of the value placed on the tenant’s interest. The Court’s pronouncement was reported in the Star Ledger,  ”N.J. Supreme Court gives commercial leaseholders more clout in negotiating eminent domain cases.”

A copy of the opinion may be found here.