Search form

New Jersey Bill Will Make Whistleblower Settlement Agreements with Public Entities Public Records

By Richard J. Cino, Joseph C. Toris and Katerina R. Mantell
  • March 27, 2017

Proposed legislation that would make whistleblower settlement agreements involving public entities available to the public has been approved unanimously by the New Jersey Assembly on March 23, 2017.

The New Jersey Assembly Bill (A-4243) would bar public entities and public employees from entering into confidential settlements of whistleblower claims asserted under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, except where the settlement involves a matter concerning national security.

A public entity is defined as the state and any county, municipality, district, public authority, public agency, and any other political subdivision or public body in the state.

The bill provides that such settlements constitute public records under the open public records laws. While such information is often available under existing laws, such as the Open Public Records Act (N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq.), the proposed legislation requires that all settlement agreements be prominently displayed on the Attorney General’s website, in a searchable format, and include:

  1. the date the agreement was signed;
  2. the names of the parties;
  3. a description of the claims;
  4. the total amount each party is obligated to pay; and
  5. the total amount of compensation for outside legal counsel.

Supporters of the bill maintain that it will prevent public entities from keeping information involving the expenditure of public funds on such litigation confidential.

Jackson Lewis Morristown and Monmouth County attorneys are available to discuss this bill and other developments.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

March 20, 2019

New Jersey Prohibits Enforcement of Non-Disclosure Provisions in Settlement Agreements, Other Contracts

March 20, 2019

A sweeping amendment to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) bars enforcement of non-disclosure provisions in settlement agreements and employment contracts, and prohibits the waiver of substantive and procedural rights under the statute. The amendment applies to all contracts and agreements entered into, renewed, modified, or... Read More

February 28, 2019

Portland, Oregon, Bars Discrimination Against Atheists, Agnostics

February 28, 2019

An amendment to the civil rights code of Portland, Oregon, extends protections against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations to atheists, agnostics, and other “non-believers.” Religious facilities are expressly exempt. The Portland City Code, chapter 23.01, already prohibits discrimination on the basis of... Read More

February 27, 2019

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) Is Not Subject to Equitable Tolling

February 27, 2019

In a decision important to class action practice, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), which establishes a 14-day deadline to seek permission to appeal an order granting or denying class certification, is not subject to equitable tolling. Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, No. 17-1094 (Feb. 26, 2019... Read More

Related Practices