The Supreme Court of New Jersey did not decide many employment cases this term, but the ones it did decide are significant. For instance, DePascale v. State of New Jersey, 211 N.J. 40 (2012),addressed one of the most politically charged and highly publicized issues of the year: whether statutory increases in the pension and health-care contributions required of justices and judges violated the “no- diminution” clause of the New Jersey Constitution. A divided court held that they did, in a majority opinion delivered jointly by Justices LaVecchia and Albin and Judge Wefing (temporarily assigned). Chief Justice Rabner recused, and Justice Patterson wrote a dissent that was joined in by Justice Hoens.
The Pension and Health Care Benefits Act (Chapter 78) was enacted into law on June 28, 2011. It is not directed specifically to members of the judiciary, but rather is applicable to all public employees and requires increased contributions to benefits. According to the majority opinion, over a seven-year period Chapter 78 would have increased required pension contributions of sitting justices and judges by more than 400 percent and increased health benefit contributions by more than 100 percent.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
