Newsletter April 2017

Newsletter April 2017

Hyderally & Associates, P.C. April 2017 Newsletter

Whistleblower Protections

Both New Jersey and New York have enacted what are commonly referred to as “whistleblower” laws. The basic premise of a whistleblower law is to protect an employee who reports illegal or fraudulent activity by their employer from the threat of retaliation by said employer. For example, an employee who reported misconduct by a supervisor and was subsequently demoted or terminated, may have a viable claim based on a violation of one or more relevant whistleblower laws.

There are numerous federal whistleblower laws. The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, provides protection to whistleblowing employees of the federal government. Additionally, the federal Clean Air Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Energy Reorganization Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Solid Waste Disposal Act; Toxic Substance Control Act; and Water Pollution Control Act all contain protections for an employee who complains about safety or health hazards either in the workplace, or to the environment, caused by an employer.

On the state level as well, most states provide some form of protection for whistleblowing employees, be it by statute or common law. In order to qualify for protection, most Whistleblower laws generally require that a whistleblowing employee has a good-faith belief that his or her employer is engaged in misconduct. However, the parameters of that misconduct, and thereby, what is included in the definition of protected activity under the whistleblowing law, varies widely from state to state. Some states’ whistleblower laws broadly define protected activity and are more inclusive, while other states, provide a narrower definition, thus, making it considerably more difficult to fall under the law’s protections. Not all disclosures of misconduct are the same, and a report of a certain type of illegal conduct by an employer may be included in one state’s whistleblower law but not in that of another. Thus, it is imperative that a potential whistleblower claimant analyze his or her claims under the specific whistleblower law of his or her state.


By Ty Hyderally, Esq. and Isaac Graff, Esq.

Hyderally & Associates, P.C.

Whistleblower Laws of New Jersey and New York Compared

The whistleblower laws of New Jersey and New York provide a prime example of the differences that exist between the various state whistleblower laws mentioned in the preceding article. In general, New Jersey’s whistleblower law, is broader and provides more protection to whistleblowing employees than New York’s law.

New Jersey’s whistleblower law is the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”).  New York’s is referred to, aptly, as the New York Whistleblower Law (“NYWL”). N.Y. Lab. Law § 740 – 741.  The most significant difference between the respective laws lies in their parameters for what kind of whistleblowing activity falls under the laws’ protections.  The NYWL requires a showing that the activity, policy, or practice of the employer which was disclosed by the employee “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety, or which constitutes health care fraud[.]” N.Y. Lab. Law § 740(a)(2).  Thus, if an employee reports illegal activity by its employer, but that illegal activity does not create a substantial danger to the public safety, the employee will not be protected by the NYWL.  Notably, reporting things like financial misconduct or discrimination by an employer, likely will not be protected by the NYWL because they do not endanger the public safety.

CEPA, in contrast, affords much broader protections to whistleblowing employees.  CEPA requires a whistleblowing employee to show only that “he or she reasonably believed that his or her employer’s conduct was violating either a law, rule, or regulation promulgated pursuant to law, or a clear mandate of public policy[.]”  Dzwonar v. McDevitt, 177 N.J. 451, 462 (N.J. 2003).  Thus, the disclosure of any activity an employee reasonably believed violated a law or regulation is protected by CEPA.  No showing that the employer’s conduct created a threat to public safety is required.

There are procedural differences, as well as differences regarding some of the remedies available under CEPA as opposed to NYWL; however, the most significant difference between the two laws, without question, is how they fundamentally define the whistleblowing activity they seek to protect. CEPA protects an employee disclosing, basically, any unlawful activity, while NYWL offers much narrower protections of only those disclosing an activity that threatens the public safety.


By Ty Hyderally, Esq. and Isaac Graff, Esq.

Hyderally & Associates, P.C.

Appellate Division Rules that the Port Authority is Not Subject to CEPA Claims

These differences between CEPA and the NYWL were put under the microscope in a recent New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division ruling.  The Appellate Division ruled on March 15, 2017 that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is not subject to CEPA claims because of the stark differences between CEPA and the NYWL. Sullivan v. Port Auth. Of N.Y. & N.J., 2017 N.J. Super. LEXIS 33 (March 15, 2017).

Appellant Brian Sullivan, a police sergeant with the Port Authority, was terminated in June, 2012 after notifying a supervisor of improper conduct related to the administration of evaluations of police officers being considered for promotion. In May, 2013, Sullivan filed a claim in New Jersey Superior Court alleging retaliation in violation of CEPA.

The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Port Authority based on a finding that the Port Authority does not provide for unilateral state action under CEPA. Upon appeal, the Appellate Division agreed and affirmed the Superior Court’s holding.

The Port Authority is a bi-state agency that has waived its sovereign immunity since 1951. However, the Port Authority “expressly prohibits unilateral action by one state without the concurrence of the legislature of the other state.” Id. at *8. See also N.J.S.A.32:1-8 (2017). Despite that, the Port Authority may be subject to unilateral action by one state, when the two states’ laws are “complimentary or parallel[.]” Sullivan, N.J. Super. at *9.  Thus, one state’s law may be applied to the Port Authority if it is “substantially similar” to that of the other state. Id. Absent a substantially similar law, “the court must determine whether the bi-state agency impliedly consented to unilateral state regulation.” Id. (citation omitted).  Therefore, the Court had to determine if CEPA is substantially similar to New York’s Whistleblower Law, N.Y. Lab. Law § 740 (2017).

To find that the laws are substantially similar, the two state’s “legislatures must 'have adopted a substantially similar policy that is apparent in their respective statutes.” Id. at *10. (internal quotations and citations omitted).  Factors relevant to this determination “include: (1) the scope of the comparative laws; (2) the filing limitations period; (3) the types of remedies and damages available; and (4) the right to trial by jury.” Id.  In its analysis, the court found that New Jersey’s CEPA provides much broader protections to New Jersey employees than does New York’s Whistleblower Law. Id. at 12.  In particular, the court focused on the difference discussed in the preceding article – that CEPA does not require a showing that the activity, policy, or practice which was disclosed by the employee “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety, or which constitutes health care fraud[.]” N.Y. Lab. Law § 740(a)(2).  Thus, the court found that CEPA’s protections extent to a much broader class of actions than the NYWL. Allowing the claim to proceed would “constitute an impermissible unilateral expansion of the Port Authority's liability.” Sullivan, N.J. Super. at *12.  The court also noted that the remedies available under each law differ. Id. Under CEPA, an employee may be awarded punitive damages and an assessment of civil fines, remedies not available under the NYWL. Id.  Lastly, CEPA permits trial by jury whereas the NYWL does not. Id.  In its conclusion, the court held that “[t]here is no evidence that New York and New Jersey mutually intended to consent to suit under CEPA” and, absent substantially similar laws, the Port Authority is not subject to suit under CEPA. Id. at *13-14.

Despite an employee’s inability to bring a CEPA claim against the Port Authority, the agency adopted an internal whistleblower policy in March, 2015. This policy protects employees from adverse action as a result of reporting misconduct, objecting to or refusing to participate in misconduct, and for cooperating with a public investigation. Employees may report misconduct anonymously and whistleblowers who feel they were the victim of adverse action may report the action which will trigger an internal investigation. Employees whose claims are substantiated may be reinstated to their former position.


By Ty Hyderally, Esq. and Isaac Graff, Esq.

These articles are for informational purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice, and may not reasonably be relied upon as such. If you face a legal issue, you should consult a qualified attorney for independent legal advice with regard to your particular set of facts. This newsletter may constitute attorney advertising. This newsletter is not intended to communicate with anyone in a state or other jurisdiction where such a newsletter may fail to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state of jurisdiction.

  • “I want to sincerely thank you and your staff for your resolve and professional zeal in resolving my issues with [company name removed for privacy reasons]. I especially want to thank Rob Szyba who handled these proceedings with dignity and a great deal of knowledge and professionalism. He knows what buttons to push and when to push them. He is an asset to your organization. I will gladly recommend your services to anyone in need. It was a privilege to deal with you and your team.”
  • “It has been my pleasure to work with Ty through the ABA's Employment Rights and Responsibilities Committee. His contributions to the Committee have been significant due to his knowledge of employment law and his tireless devotion to teaching trial skills. His service to the profession and his clients is commendable.”
    Paula Ardelean
  • “Ty is dedicated to his work and his clients. He knows his stuff, and he goes the extra mile to do the best job possible. Ty is a pleasure to work with!”
    Piper Hoffman
  • “It is with pleasure that I recommend Ty. He is a tireless advocate on behalf of employees and their concerns. His efforts are demonstrated not only in his practice, but also in his exceptional additional efforts to represent this community in professional associations, such as the ABA. He has the knowledge base and the tireless effort that makes working with him productive, but always enjoyable too.”
    Darlene Vorachek
  • “I have worked with Ty on several legal presentations. I represent employers, and Ty has invited me to participate as a panelist representing employers' perspectives on labor and employment matters. Ty is always well-prepared and very knowledgeable about developments in employment law, and is always a pleasure to work with.”
    Chris Dalton
  • “Ty is an excellent lawyer who completely understands the legal process and does everything in his power to help his clients. He was a pleasure to work with and would recommend him to anyone seeking his expertise.”
    Joseph Alvaro
  • “Ty is a widely recognized expert in the area of employment law. His aggressive representation of clients is backed up by an extraordinary breadth of knowledge and attention to detail.”
    Edward Kopelson
  • “I have known Ty professionally for more than two years. He is nationally recognized as one of the best employment attorney's in the country and I know his practice will continue to grow!”
    Betsy Zaplin
  • “Ty was a great help for my associate and I during litigation. He showed the highest degree of professionalism and did in fact help us to achieve the best end result possible. Mr. Hyderally comes highly recommended.”
    Christopher Power
  • “Ty is an exceptional attorney. Ty strives for and attains great results, in a fair and ethical manner. I value his professionalism, integrity and creativity. His ability to relate to the client and colleagues on various levels makes him very personable and a real asset.”
    Betty MacKnight
  • “Ty Hyderally is a light of hope at times when all seems grim and hopeless. A brilliant lawyer focused on labor and business law. Mr. Hyderally has the ability to combine his knowledge of the law with economic sense, strategic thinking and level headed decision making that more often than not results in a sensible conclusion that ultimately equates to a positive result for his client. Mr Hyderally is a pleasure to work with and a person you would want to have on your side of the table.”
    Richard Sapienza
  • “I have known Ty Hyderally and his firm for a number of years through our shared affiliation with the National Employment Lawyers Association. Ty has consistently impressed me both with his leadership qualities as well as the quality of workmanship that he and his firm generate. I have reviewed some of his firm's work product, including a sample initial client letter, which not only contained excellent advice to new clients but also included cutting edge information as to how to properly address social networking issues. Without hesitation, I would highly recommend Ty Hyderally.”
    Fred Shahrooz Scampato
  • “I would highly recommend the Law Office of Ty Hyderally to anyone who is in need of representation in a legal matter. Ty is one of the most knowledgeable and professional individuals that I have ever met. He not only protected my rights, but also added a personal touch in his approach which helped in relieving some of the stress of my situation. He is a hard working, kind hearted individual who goes out of his way to make your problem his and provides great results in the end.”
    Mike Fischer
  • “What impressed me most about Ty was that he delivered exactly what he promised! Very well versed in his area of practice, and extremely respected by his peers and colleagues, which put me at ease knowing he was representing me! Thank you Ty!”
    Dan Verdun
  • “I have been involved with Ty Hyderally both as an adversary in employment litigation, and when I have acted as a Court appointed Mediator in employment litigation matters in which Ty represented plaintiffs. In both types of situations, he has represented his clients very well, with an excellent command of the issues, and he has shown himself to be well-prepared, reliable, and sensitive to the concerns of his clients. He has conducted himself in a highly professional manner at all times. I have referred potential plaintiffs in employment matters to him (I represent management/defendants in such matters), since I believe he is highly qualified to consider their circumstances.”
    Wayne Positan
  • “Ty helped us in my small business with a very delicate matter involving what was once a very cherished employee who had made some bad choices. Because it was also emotional for me and my management team, we valued the professionalism and expertise that Ty offered. It was comforting to know we could rely on his service through that very challenging time and handle it with compassion and in compliance with the law. I would use him again and recommend him wholeheartedly!”
    Sherry Blair
  • “Ty is detail oriented yet moves quickly to get results. He contemplates each step and what action should be taken. Ty looks out for his client's best interest and is available to talk during evening hours when it is more appropriate to discuss options to take from home. Also, Ty is expedient in getting information needed in order to be cognizant of finances. I highly recommend Ty for legal services, especially with employment law.”
    Jeff Martens
  • “If the opportunity arises where a "name brand" attorney is needed, then Ty Hyderally is the only choice. Those in the know are aware that his record of success for his clients is outstanding and that his knowledge of his field is way above the rest”
    Jeff Baron
  • “Ty Hyderally is a lawyer's lawyer. I, also, used to handle plaintiffs' employment cases, but over time, those cases became more and more complicated and costly to pursue. They began to require the attention of a legal specialist. I decided against handling them personally. I was delighted when I met Ty. Now, I refer people to him all the time. I know that he will give the best advice and get the best results possible. I hope my employees don't have his card.”
  • “Many of my executive clients need to negotiate employment contracts or employment confilcts with their employer. As an executive coach, I support their efforts in all domains of their lives including recommending a lawyer when they have these employment contractual needs, I recommend Ty. Not once have I had any negative feedback from any client and all of my dealings with him have been very satisfying.”
    Dan McNeill
  • “Ty is a very knowledgeable Attorney, who has demonstrated a very proven track record in handling Employment cases. His knowledge and assertive approach have made him a very successful Attorney.”
    John Mcnamara
  • “I actually first worked with Ty at McKenna McIlwain LLP in 2008. Already I was impressed by his professionalism, client list and reputation. In 2011 I moved back to Montclair after a few years back home in Oregon. Ty was in need of a temporary administrative assistant and invited me to join his team at their new, independent location. I learned a great deal working with Hyderally & Associates, P.C. They have earned their reputation as the hardest hitting, best representation available for employment matters in New Jersey and New York alike. They are attentive, fair, and go every extra mile to ensure due diligence. I am proud to have them on my resume and am happy for the experience of being part of such a busy, professional and fast paced team.”
    Mary Otte
  • “Ty secured settlements that were nothing less than outstanding for my clients/contacts that I have referred to him. The quick speed with which he achieved his results was a huge bonus to those clients.”
    Robert Kornitzer
  • “I have worked with Ty for years through the ABA Labor & Employment Law Section Employment Rights and Responsibilities Committee. Ty is a go-to source for exemplary presentations on trial practice. A tireless advocate for employee rights, Ty is an accomplished trial attorney and someone we can rely on and have repeatedly relied upon in mock trial presentations at our yearly conferences.”
    John Beasley
  • “Ty is a regular lecturer at continuing education programs for lawyers. This means that because of his abilities he is called upon to enhance the skills of lawyers who are already experienced. He is well regarded as a trial lawyer and as a provider of legal advice to clients. I find that his companionable persona makes it easier to accept and understand his thoughts and advice.”
    Arnie Pedowitz
  • “I have known Ty Hyderally for several years and can only describe him as an expert in all areas of Employment law. I have referred several people to him in connection with their legal concerns and on each occasion I have been met with very positive feedback from these individuals and businesses. I have personally sought his counsel relating to a variety of business strategy issues within my own Insurance practice. With his substantial experience and proven track record, I wholeheartedly recommend his services.”
    Matthew McGovern, Esq.
  • “Ty has represented me numerous times and I have always come out with positive results. He keeps you well informed at each step of the process and always makes you feel confident and secure. I highly recommend his services.”
    John Scardino Jr
  • “Ty and I worked at the same law firm Friedman Siegelbaum. I found him a pleasure to work with and an able and diligent attorney.”
    Joel Glucksman
  • “If ever someone needs an exceptional employment litigator, Ty is the first person that I think of. Not only is he incredibly intelligent, but he is able to craft litigation strategies to maximize his client's outcome. He is a relentless litigator, with great passion for his work. If you hire Ty, you will not be disappointed.”
    Noah B. Rosenfarb, CPA, ABV, PFS, CDFA
  • “Ty has been invaluable to me as a business owner with employee issues. His advice has been on point and redirected me in the midst of employee concerns. I would highly recommend him and his firm whenever you have employment concerns.”
    Philip Seaver
  • “If you are looking for one of the best attorney's in an employment related issue, look no further. Ty is national recognized as one of the best employment attorney in the country and I am thrilled to see his practice continue to grow!”
    Jon Lamkin
  • “Ty, has been a great help to me in times of need when I needed his advice on some business matters. He is always available 24-7 to help out whether it is a small/large task. I would highly recommend him and his firm in any legal matter that he specializes in.”
    Eric Reinstein
  • “I have been working with Ty for over 4 years. Ty is one person I would say pays attention to detail, works hard for his clients and gets the job done on time and with amazing results. I have referred clients to him and he has always given them star treatment was always up front and honest with them and they are so pleased with their outcomes and glad I made the introduction.”
    Carmen Bucco
  • “Ty was an adversary and never lost sight of his client's needs in seeking a resolution. I would not hesitate to recommend for plaintiffs in employment work. He is methodical and tenacious but fair and amenable to a just resolution.”
    Roger Jacobs
  • “My Husband and I hired Ty at a time when we thought all was lost. We had a different attorney on our case that just gave up on us. My husband contacted Ty and once he heard our case he immediately took action. Our case was settled within 3 months of Ty taking over. His experience and knowledge of employment laws are not only impressive but it is why he is very successful. Ty is also very compassionate about his clients and communicated with us every step of the way. I would recommend Ty Hyderally to anyone and everyone who is need of a great attorney. You too!! Will be satisfied.”
    Cynthia Ortiz
  • “I have referred clients to Ty for employment issues. They told me that Ty was knowledgeable, courteous and promptly handled their matters. I can easily recommend Ty for people with difficult employment cases.”
    Eileen Kohutis
  • “Working with Ty on various projects has been fantastic. He and his team are thorough and they understand how to get the job done correctly. When you have the chance to work with Ty you understand the meaning of not taking no for an answer. They work to understand clients needs and the resolve the issues at hand. I have seen firsthand what Ty and his associates bring to the table and I would recommend them to anyone needing assistance with employment law.”
    Darren Magarro
  • “I have worked with Ty Hyderally on the executive board of the New Jersey chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association, and have discussed various employment matters with him. He is an excellent leader, always coming up with new ideas. Ty is truly an expert in employment law and I have found his analysis of both complex and simple matters to be dead on.”
    Leslie A. Farber
  • "Ty and I have worked together on a case getting ready for trial. We have also worked on trial advocacy presentations for the ABA. Ty is a very experienced litigator. He has great trial skills and connects well with his clients, the court and jury. He blends a sense of humor with knowledge of the law and facts. He is a very effective advocate.”
    Vanessa Kelly