It’s a mantra that can’t be repeated too often: Develop a policy, communicate it to your employees, investigate when you learn of possible infractions and, if wrongdoing did occur, punish those who violated the policy. It’s refreshing to report on an employer that did everything right and emerged victorious from court.

A New Jersey appeals court has upheld the termination of an employee even though a government agency cleared him of the alleged misconduct that led to his dismissal. That means employers still have the right to make their own decisions about conduct and what they believe happened.

Relatively few lawsuits—including discrimination and employment-related cases—are actually tried in a courtroom. In most cases, the parties reach a private settlement. But what happens if the parties reach a settlement and the employer holds up its end of the bargain, only to have the employee have second thoughts and bring another lawsuit?

A New Jersey court has held that e-mails employees send to their attorneys via work computers are not protected by the attorney-client privilege. The court’s willingness to rule that an employer’s right to control how employees use its computer equipment trumps attorney-client privilege is significant. The decision makes it clearer than ever that employers should carefully consider the language they use in their employee handbooks.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled for the first time on the proof employees must offer to make a religion-based hostile work environment claim stick. The case, Cutler v. Dorn, established that New Jersey courts must decide workplace religious discrimination claims using the same legal standards they use in racial and gender discrimination claims.

Employers that think their liability ends when a terminated employee walks out the door better think again. A recent New Jersey case expanded employees’ rights to sue employers for post-termination nonemployment-related conduct. In the wake of the decision, courts may construe common employer acts as retaliation ...

Q. Can an employee sue us in the New Jersey Superior Court for the same alleged discrimination still pending before the Division on Civil Rights? ...

Q. A female sales representative submitted a harassment complaint to HR about comments posted by one of her co-workers on MySpace. Our company’s Internet policy addresses only use of the Internet and personal e-mail in the office. Can we discipline the employee? ...

Q. I’ve required employees seeking FMLA leave to have their doctors fill out the DOL's medical certification form. Too often, though, the information I get from doctors is too vague to be much help. Is there any way I can get more detail in these forms? ...

Q. My company recently terminated an employee. The employee claims that she is entitled to a letter outlining the reasons for her discharge. Is she correct? If so, how much information must we provide the discharged employee? ...

Q. Our company is considering providing anti-harassment training to all employees. Some executives are concerned that the training might actually stir up lawsuits. Do you recommend such training? ...

Q. Recently, money from my office’s petty cash lockbox came up missing. As a part of our investigation, can we require employees to take a lie detector test? ...

Q. I work for an Internet company with about 50 other employees. Recently, there have been several complaints around the office about theft of personal property. The problem has become a distraction in the workplace and I was asked to investigate the incidents.

Our employee manual does not have any policies prohibiting theft of personal property, and there are no notices that warn employees that their work areas may be searched. What right does my company have to search a suspected employee’s work space and personal items to try to locate property not owned or related to my company? ...

In May 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Inc., a case that limits the potential liability of employers in wage discrimination claims brought under Title VII. Although New Jersey state courts often look to federal decisions for guidance, it is uncertain how Ledbetter will be applied in a state court action involving the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination ...

Many employees have some type of medical condition or disability that affects their ability to perform their jobs. Employers need to understand their obligations to disabled employees and the rights granted to disabled employees under New Jersey law. A decision recently handed down by the New Jersey Supreme Court clarifies exactly what obligation employers have to accommodate disabled employees under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination ...

Over the past few years, large companies such as Microsoft, Abercrombie and Fitch, Intel, Federal Express, UPS, IKEA and Burger King have been involved in multimillion dollar class-action lawsuits for violating state and federal wage-and-hour laws. Now add Wal-Mart to that list ...

No doubt you’ve had employees complain about everything from unfair wages to unsafe working conditions, from harassment to retaliation. It’s your job to sort out the legitimate claims from the frivolous ones. Help has arrived. The New Jersey Supreme Court has made it easier to get a frivolous case tossed out early in the litigation process by making employees show they have a good case.

In April 2007, radio talk show host Don Imus made racially disparaging remarks about the Rutgers women’s basketball team on the “Imus in the Morning” show. The Imus experience serves as a high-profile example of how discriminatory comments can have serious consequences when made in an employment setting ...

New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) prohibits discrimination against employees because of their “race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, affectional or sexual orientation, marital status, familial status, liability for services in the Armed Forces of the United States, disability or nationality” ...

The New Jersey Supreme Court has described the state’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA) as “the most far reaching ‘whistle-blower statute’ in the nation” ...

Both federal and New Jersey state statutes hold perpetrators criminally liable for the possession or viewing of child pornography. But a recent New Jersey Appellate Division decision opens the door for employers to be held civilly liable for failing to prevent these acts ...

One of the toughest tasks for HR is to decide which employees are supervisors. Employers need to know this because supervisors are excluded from a collective bargaining unit for union organizing and voting purposes ...