22 A.3d 11
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2011Background
- Lapidoth, a Telcordia employee, took a year-long maternity leave approved by two leave letters in 2005–2006 with guaranteed reinstatement to the same/comparable job.
- After a February 2006 reorganization reduced ARIS reporting lines, Cocea was kept as the ARIS release manager and Lapidoth’s position was eliminated.
- Lapidoth planned to return in July 2006 but was terminated due to lack of an available position, with the company citing at-will employment.
- She filed suit alleging breach of contract and interference with FMLA/NJFLA rights; the trial court granted Telcordia summary judgment on FMLA/NJFLA and contract claims, holding the 12-month leave fell outside those statutes and that the Code disclaimer barred contractual rights.
- On appeal, the court reversed as to the contract claim, held that FMLA/NJFLA do not cover 12-month leaves, and concluded the two letters could be interpreted as a promise of reinstatement, remanding for further proceedings.
- The decision discusses Woolley, Shebar, and related authorities to assess whether the letters created contractual rights or merely reflected an at-will policy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the FMLA/NJFLA require reinstatement after a 12-month leave? | Lapidoth argues longer leaves may trigger reinstatement. | Telcordia relies on Ragsdale limiting reinstatement to ≤12 weeks. | FMLA/NJFLA do not require reinstatement after a 12-month leave. |
| Did the two authorization letters create a contractual right to reinstatement? | Letters could form a contract promising reinstatement. | Letters merely reflected policy; at-will disclaimer controls. | Yes, the letters could be read to promise reinstatement; contract claim survives. |
Key Cases Cited
- Woolley v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., 99 N.J. 284, 491 A.2d 1257 (New Jersey Supreme Court, 1985) (disclaimer must be conspicuous to preclude contract rights; manuals can create unilateral contracts when disseminated)
- Shebar v. Sanyo Bus. Sys. Corp., 111 N.J. 276, 544 A.2d 377 (New Jersey Supreme Court, 1988) (promises to employee can create contractual rights; reliance on employer representations matters)
- Troy v. Rutgers, 168 N.J. 354, 774 A.2d 476 (New Jersey Supreme Court, 2001) (employment policy can create contractual rights, depending on context and disclosures)
- Nicosia v. Wakefern Food Corp., 136 N.J. 401, 643 A.2d 554 (New Jersey Supreme Court, 1994) (disclaimer effectiveness and employee reasonable expectations govern contract rights)
- Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 535 U.S. 81, 122 S. Ct. 1155, 152 L. Ed. 2d 167 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2002) (FMLA’s twelve-week entitlement is a fundamental guarantee; notice-related 12-week extension is invalid)