Analysis

How the Supreme Court's Ruling on a Retracted Work Promise 'Impacts All Employers in New Jersey'

"Although the court ruled within the context of the Uniform Securities Law, I can envision the court’s teachings to apply in other settings," Peter Verniero said.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

When employment is promised orally for months and then the offer is rescinded, can the employer be liable for damages even though a contract was never signed?

Some attorneys contend the state Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year in Goldfarb v. Solimine, in which the plaintiff claimed promissory estoppel after the defendant backed out of a verbal contract to hire him as a financial adviser to handle his family’s extensive investment portfolio, sends a clear message.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Suzette Parmley

Suzette Parmley

Trenton Correspondent who covers the N.J. Supreme Court, Governor, Legislature. She also contributes to The Legal Intelligencer and law.com. Suzette joined New Jersey Law Journal in Jan. 2019 from the Philadelphia Inquirer where she was a former Trenton Statehouse Correspondent and Business Reporter/Columnist. Awards: 1st Place for 2020 coverage of NJ Supreme Court; 2019 Specialized Writing Category, 5-time winner of the Business Financial Writing Portfolio Award from the New Jersey Press Association. Graduate of the Fels Center of Government/University of Pennsylvania. Email: [email protected] or follow on Twitter: @SuzParmley

More from this author

Recommended Stories

Muddy Waters: Navigating TAR Protocol

Molly Hurley Kellett |

A recent decision in the District of New Jersey demonstrates the pitfalls of including requirements for the parties to disclose and agree to the use of technology assisted review (TAR) within the protocol. But it likewise demonstrates the importance of agreement on TAR methodology.

More from ALM

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Privacy Policy

About Us / Contact Us / Site Map / Advertise With Us/ Customer Service / Terms of Service/ FAQ / Privacy Policy

Publications

Law Topics

Rankings

More

Law.com

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.