Consumer Protection

Published on: April 30, 2024

Non-Compete Agreements Would be Abolished Under New FTC Rule

New Jersey employment law has generally upheld non-compete (or non-competition) agreements provided they met certain requirements aimed at allowing employees to earn a living. Non-compete agreements have been much vilified by pro-employee groups, and much 5-225x300 supported by pro-employer groups. However, the United States Federal Trade Commission has issued a rule which would prohibit non-compete agreements. At least one lawsuit has been filed aiming to block the new regulation, and others are expected. So whether the rule will take effect, and if so in what form it will be allowed, is still an open question. However, employers and employees should be prepared, because unless an injunction is issued the rule will become effective in several months.

The Rule

The Rule, part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, defines non-compete clauses as:

Published on: December 18, 2020

Opinions in Other Areas of New Jersey Law Provide Guidance When Challenging Arbitration Agreements in New Jersey Employment Contracts

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

It is interesting that the trend in New Jersey employment law is to enforce arbitration agreements in employment contracts, while at the same time finding them unenforceable in consumer and commercial contracts. However, the law is the same: whatever the area, arbitration agreements are interpreted and enforced – or not enforceable – under New Jersey contract law. It’s therefore worth looking at two recent opinions in these areas to see what can be learned.

The Knight Case: Consumer Contracts and Consumer Fraud

In the first, a published opinion in case of Knight v. Vivint Solar Developer, LLC, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey stuck down an arbitration agreement which the defendants tried to enforce in a consumer fraud lawsuit over the sale of solar panels. After Knight sued, Vivint filed a motion to courthouse-1223280__340-300x200 dismiss her complaint and enforce an arbitration agreement which required the parties to arbitrate their disputes.

Published on: April 2, 2020

Bankruptcy Considerations During the Coronavirus (COV-19) Part 3: Chapter 7 Bankruptcy

by Robert Chewning, Esq.

Published on: March 23, 2020

Summary of New Jersey Governor Murphy’s New Order Concerning Restrictions on Businesses and People

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

Published on: June 15, 2018

Sports Gambling in New Jersey

by Pauline M.K. Young

horse-3433879__340-300x262
New Jersey has been trying to legalize sports betting for years. One of the primary hurdles for that legalization has been the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA). That law, enacted by Congress in 1992, make it unlawful for a government entity to authorize, operate, etc., gambling on competitive games in which athletes participate. PASPA – also known as the Bradley Act – excluded Oregon, Delaware, Montana, and Nevada from its sports betting prohibitions. New Jersey (and any other state which had licensed casino gambling) had a 1-year window to pass laws permitting sports betting. However, New Jersey did not pass such a law within that window of time.

Later, in 2011, New Jersey voters approved an amendment to the state constitution to permit the legislature to create laws to permit sports gambling. (Sports gambling would still not be permitted for college sporting events taking place in the State of New Jersey or involving a New Jersey team.)

In 2012 the first Sports Wagering Act was introduced to permit betting on sports at racetracks and casinos. That Act was challenged by virtually all major sports associations (NFL, MLB, NHL, etc.) and ultimately struck down by the District Court as violating PASPA.

Published on: February 22, 2016

Representing Homeowners in Defending Construction Lien Claims

by McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC

Representing Homeowners in Defending Construction Lien Claims

Our New Jersey construction attorneys represent homeowners who, through no fault of their own, have construction liens (called “mechanics liens” in years past) filed against their property.

Typical Scenarios Where Homeowners Get it Trouble

Published on: February 19, 2016

The Regulation of Solid Waste Transportation

by Pauline M.K. Young

hauler
Virtually every business in New Jersey is regulated in some way, shape, or form. Accounting firms are regulated by the Department of Law & Public Safety and regulations require accounting firms to have certified public accountants. Home improvement contractors are often required to be registered with the Department of Labor and Department of Treasury. Health clubs are required to register and issue a security bond with the Department of Law and Public Safety. Restaurants are regulated by local health departments. However, businesses which involve the transportation, storage, or disposal of solid waste are some of the most regulated and highly scrutinized businesses in the State of New Jersey.

Solid waste haulers or transporters are regulated by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP”), Division of Solid Waste Management and/or the Division of Solid & Hazardous Waste Management.

However, first, for tax and liability purposes, a business will generally form a company or business entity (such as a corporation or limited liability company). In doing this, the company will likely file for a Certificate of Formation and a request a FEIN (or Federal Employer Identification Number).

Published on: February 16, 2016

McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC Attorneys Recover $289,918 For Homeowners in Construction Arbitration

by McLaughlin & Nardi, LLC

McLaughlin & Nardi’s New Jersey construction attorneys recently completed a construction arbitration in the American Arbitration Association. After hearing the evidence, the arbitrator awarded our clients $289,918. Maurice McLaughlin was the lead trial attorney. He was assisted throughout by Pauline Young and Robert Chewning, who second chaired the hearings.

Background

The case involved Essex County homeowners who had contracted for extensive renovations to their kitchen. The total cost of the kitchen renovations was $152,725. The homeowners paid $126,362.50. However, the contractor never completed the job.

Published on: June 2, 2014

New Jersey Lemon Law – Protection for New Vehicles

by Boris Peyner

Purchasing a new car is a major financial investment. Consumers incur high costs to purchase a vehicle and even higher costs to repair defects. Understanding the economic impact, New Jersey’s Legislature passed the New Jersey Lemon Law Act. The law is one of the strongest, most comprehensive, and effective in the country. It protects consumers who purchase or lease vehicles that are defective.

The New Jersey Lemon Law covers all new vehicles that develop a defect during the first two years of ownership or 24,000 miles, whichever comes first. The law covers new passenger cars, trucks, motorcycles, and certain authorized emergency vehicles purchased, leased, or registered in the State of New Jersey. Commercial vehicles are not covered.

The law requires manufacturers to repair reported defects within a reasonable time. The law also provides for remedies to consumers whose vehicles are not repaired and the defect impairs the use, value, or safety of the new vehicle. The law, however, does not vehicle defects which are the results of an accident, abuse, vandalism, or wear and tear. Also, the law does not cover defects caused by repair or modification to a vehicle by a person other than the manufacturer or car dealer.

Defects should be immediately reported to the dealer. Consumers should keep copies of all receipts for repairs and record mileage as well as the repair work completed. Dealers are permitted a reasonable amount of time to make repairs to correct a defect.
Continue reading

Published on: January 22, 2013

Consumer Protection – A Guide To The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

by Boris Peyner

The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act was enacted in 1975 to govern written warranties on consumer products. Oral warranties are not covered by the Act. Commercial warranties are not covered by this Act. Warranties on services are not covered by the Act. Instead, the Act was enacted to require the manufactures and sellers of consumer products to give consumers detailed information regarding warranty coverage, and to require sellers to live up to their warranties.

The Act does not require that a warranty be provided. However, if a warranty is provided it must be clearly written and easy to understand. The warranty must be designated as either “full” or “limited” and readily available for inspection.

Further, if a warranty is provided, the Act serves many useful purposes. First, it allows consumers to get complete information about warranty terms and conditions. The Act also enables consumers to compare warranty coverage before buying a consumer good. Additionally, the Act ensures warranty competition by allowing consumers to be able to pick a product, based on a combination of the price, features, and warranty. Finally, the Acts provides incentives for companies to perform on their warranty obligations in a timely and through manner and to resolve disputes without delay and expense to the consumer.

The Act protects consumers in many ways. First, the Act prohibits the disclaimer of implied warranties when a written warranty is offered. This means that consumers will always receive an implied warranty of merchantability regardless of how broad or narrow the written warranty is. An implied warranty can only be limited to the duration of the written warranty. For example, if a written warranty is limited to one year, then the implied warranty can be also limited to a year.
Continue reading