Employees who are thinking of filing a lawsuit often wonder why so many cases never make it to the trial phase. Victims of employment discrimination face unique challenges and the vast majority of employment discrimination lawsuits never go to trial. They are either dismissed beforehand by the court or settled between the parties. Only a small percentage of New Jersey employment discrimination suits ever reach a jury verdict. This is consistent with national employment litigation patterns, whether brought under state discrimination statutes or under federal law, Title VII.
Don’t sit on your rights. I am an aggressive and compassionate employment law attorney who is experienced in successfully representing persons who were subjected to workplace discrimination, and in recovering financial renumeration for lost wages, humiliation, pain and suffering. New Jersey Age Discrimination Lawyer. If you are experiencing discrimination, you should contact this office immediately at 201 599-9600 for a free consultation. I accept cases from all over NJ and have locations in Southern, Central and Northern NJ to meet with clients.
According to data collected by the Federal Judicial Center on employment cases alleging that the employer committed an adverse act against an employee, less than 4% go to trial. These statistics are nationwide, not specific to NJ, and were comprised from data in studies which evaluated discovery protocols in employment lawsuits. The results from the Federal Judicial Center, highlighted in its report that employment law trials are rare compared to pre-trial resolutions of the case. In one pilot study, it found that the vast majority of federal employment lawsuits are resolved before a trial with approximately 45%–48% settling and 25%–27% being voluntarily dismissed. Summary judgment accounts for about 13%–14% of case dispositions, avoiding full trials.
Statistics Show That Employment Discrimination Employees Plaintiffs Fare Better in State Courts than in Federal Courts
In New Jersey, employees are protected from discrimination in the workplace under both Federal and State laws. Statistics show that employment discrimination employees plaintiffs fare better in state courts than in federal courts, where the cases are dismissed at a higher rate. Victims of employment discrimination face unique challenges according to recent studies of judgments and settlements in employment discrimination cases litigated in federal courts. According to an article published in the University of Minnesota Law Review, empirical studies of these cases reveal that only five percent of all plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases will receive any form of litigated relief. By contrast, 86 percent of litigated workplace discrimination lawsuits in federal court are dismissed pursuant to summary judgment.
An employment discrimination lawsuit should never be filed unless there are sufficient facts to state an illegal discrimination act took place under a particular law, that the plaintiff was harmed by such act, and when the relevant law as applied to the facts could result in that relief should be provided to the plaintiff to compensate for lost wages and pain and suffering caused by the discriminatory act, and other relief. This is true not only in age claims but also in race discrimination, New Jersey Race Discrimination Lawyer, and other illegal discrimination. New Jersey is a fact pleading state; the complaint must allege specific facts known as the prima facie elements, supporting the discrimination claim: this stating of the elements is known as the prima facie case, not just state legal conclusions such as “the plaintiff was harmed by the discriminatory acts of the employer.” See NJ Employment Attorney, Employer Thinks Employee Executive is Too Old for Job.
How a Case May Be Dismissed by the Court Early in the Proceedings
Under NJ Rule 4:6-2(e), a New Jersey state court may dismiss the case early in the litigation proceedings, shortly after the complaint is filed, when the filed complaint fails to state a case upon which relief can be granted. These motions to dismiss under Rule 4:6-2(e) are filed by the defendant who argues that even if all factual allegations in the complaint are assumed true, they are legally insufficient to establish a cause of action under state or federal law.
In federal court, a court may dismiss the case shortly after the complaint is filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). This rule allows a defendant to move for dismissal of a lawsuit because the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, similar to NJ Rule 4:6-2(e). It tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint, arguing that even if all factual allegations are true, they do not state a valid legal cause of action, so the case should be dismissed.
Based on Federal Judicial Center data and related studies, employment cases in Federal court are dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim) in approximately 7% to 13% of cases, depending on the study, case, and study sample. Key findings regarding Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals in employment cases found that pilot cases were dismissed on a Rule 12 motion 7% of the time, while comparison non-employment cases were dismissed at a rate of 13%. Rule 12 motions (dismissals) and summary judgment together account for a significant portion of non-settled cases, often representing around 14-25% of final dispositions in employment lawsuits.
Summary Judgment Motions
Another reason a discrimination plaintiff’s case may be dismissed before it reaches the jury is during a Summary Judgment Motion, which typically happens later in the litigation process after the “discovery period” has ended. This “discovery” may include document exchanges, the serving and answering of interrogatories (sworn statements answering the other party’s questions) and the taking of sworn depositions of the parties and witnesses.
The party who files for summary judgment, who is typically the defendant employer in employment cases, known as “the moving party”, must submit a statement of material facts, and the opposing party, “the non-moving party”, must respond by admitting or disputing each fact with citations to the record, together with any supporting documents. A judge then, viewing the facts in a manner that is most favorable to the non-moving party, typically the Plaintiff, then decides the case whether the case may go forward or be dismissed at that juncture, by applying the law to the facts that were submitted by both sides of the dispute.
According to another study by Cornell Law School, there has been a huge increase in cases that never make it to a juror because they are dismissed at Summary Judgment.
A dismissal of the case at Summary Judgment will result when the judge decides that no substantial genuine issue of material fact exists, i.e., when after reviewing the evidence and arguments submitted by the parties, including oral arguments, based on the merits in the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits submitted on the motion clearly shows not to present any genuine issue of material fact requiring the matter to go to a trial where a jury would decide the facts.
According to the NJ Supreme Court in the New Jersey seminal case, Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (1995), when deciding a motion for summary judgment under Rule 4:46-2, the determination whether there exists such a genuine issue with respect to a material fact challenged requires the motion judge to consider whether the competent evidential materials presented, when viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party in consideration of the applicable evidentiary standard, are sufficient to permit a rational factfinder to resolve the alleged disputed issue in favor of the non-moving party, which is typically the Plaintiff.
The motion must be denied if the evidence, together with the legitimate inferences therefrom, could sustain a judgment in plaintiff's favor. In each case, the court must accept as true all the evidence which supports the position of the party defending against the motion and must accord him or her the benefit of all legitimate inferences which can be deduced therefrom, and if reasonable minds could differ, the motion must be denied, and the matter proceeds to a trial unless it is settled in the interim. See Bergen County, New Jersey Sex Discrimination Lawyer,
The Disputed Facts Must Be Substantial in Nature, Not Just Any Disputed Fact
The plaintiff’s case may be dismissed at summary judgment and not allowed to proceed to a trial merely by referencing any fact in dispute, when the disputed issues of fact are of an insubstantial nature. A plaintiff cannot defeat a motion for summary judgment merely by pointing to any fact in the dispute. The disputed facts must be substantial in nature. If the party who opposes a summary judgment dismissal, only offers a mere scintilla, fanciful, frivolous, gauzy or merely suspicious disputed facts which are immaterial or of an insubstantial nature, the plaintiff’s case will be dismissed. Viewing all facts most favorable to the non-moving party (the Plaintiff), a court may dismiss the Plaintiff’s case during summary judgment, when the evidence presented is so one-sided that the moving party (typically the Defendant or employer) must prevail as a matter of law, so there is no reason to require submission of the facts to a jury for the jury to decide.
A court should deny a summary judgment motion only where the party opposing the motion, the plaintiff, has come forward with evidence that creates a genuine issue as to any material fact that is disputed by the other side. A non-moving party cannot defeat a motion for summary judgment merely by pointing to any fact in dispute; if the disputed issues of fact are of an insubstantial nature, summary judgment is proper.
A Federal Judicial Center study showed that summary judgment was granted, in whole or in part, in employment discrimination cases approximately seventy-seven percent of the time,
in tort cases approximately sixty-one percent of the time, and in contract cases approximately fifty-nine percent of the time. On appeal employment discrimination plaintiffs do not fare much better - employment plaintiffs’ victories (both before trial and at trial) are much more likely to be reversed at the appeal level, than are employer defense victories.
What You Can Do
If you are being subjected to unlawful workplace age discrimination, contact Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law today at 201 599-9600 for a free consultation. I have represented numerous employees who were discriminated against because of their age, and I was successful in recovering financial compensation for their emotional pain and suffering, and moneys for lost wages, both for past lost wages and projected future lost wages.
If you resign, you may lose right to prevail in a lawsuit.
In many instances of discrimination and retaliation, if you resign, you may lose right to prevail in a lawsuit unless you first take certain legally required measures to preserve your job while you are still employed. If you are thinking of resigning, or think you will be fired, or have been fired, you should contact this office immediately for a free consultation to discuss your options in the safest way for you. I accept cases from all over New Jersey and have locations in Southern, Central and Northern NJ to meet with clients. Call now at 201 401-4358 for a free consultation.
Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law represents workers throughout the entire state, including Hackensack, Jersey City, Newark, Irvington, Orange, East Orange, Trenton, Paterson, Montclair, Elizabeth, North Brunswick, Cherry Hill, Vineland, Union, Plainfield, Hamilton Township, Lakewood, Edison, Parsippany-Troy Hills, Franklin, Lakewood, and every NJ County, including Bergen, Hudson, Middlesex, Essex, Monmouth, Somerset, Ocean, Union, Camden, Passaic, Morris, Gloucester, Atlantic, Burlington, Camden Counties.