Appeals

It is estimated that 95% of all civil cases, including discrimination cases, are settled prior to trial. However, a few cases make it to trial, and an even small number ends up being appealed to the Appellate Division, which is an intermediate court in the New Jersey Court system. At the appellate level, only about 18% of the cases on appeal are reversed by the Appellate Division, meaning in favor of the party appealing or cross-appealing. Conversely, 82% of the appeals are unsuccessful. However, if you have a strong enough reason for an appeal, it is better to file it than settle for an unfavorable ruling.

In addition to handling all aspects of employment and non-employment discrimination and retaliation cases at the trial level, from filing the Complaint (the lawsuit) to engaging in discovery, filing, and responding to motions, including motions for summary judgment, Chatarpaul Law also handles appeals of employment and non-employment discrimination cases.

A Notice of Appeal to the Appellate Division must be filed within 45 days of a final judgment or order. A final judgment or order is one which disposes of all claims against all parties in the lawsuit. The final judgment triggers the 45-day deadline. Appeals to the Appellate Division is of right, which means the Appellate Division is required to accept and decide your appeal. Failure to meet these times will result in your appeal being dismissed.

There are times when an appeal to the Appellate Division is made before a final judgment is entered. In such a case, an interlocutory appeal must be filed. This type of appeal is filed while a lawsuit is still pending. An interlocutory appeal must be filed within 20 days of the order from which you seek to appeal. There is no right to file an interlocutory appeal. Instead, you must obtain permission from the Appellate Division to file an interlocutory appeal by filing a Notice of Leave to Appeal, along with the brief and an appendix containing evidence you wish for the court to consider.

A Notable Win by Chatarpaul Law in the Appellate Division

In CABALLERO v. CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, a case handle by Attorney Chatarpaul at the trial and appellate level, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s disability and age discrimination case on a motion for summary judgment filed by Cablevision.

In that case, the plaintiff was fired within a few weeks after returning to work from gallbladder surgery and replaced with someone half her age. Cablevision claimed that the plaintiff was one of 25 employees who were fired because of Cablevision’s company-wide audit of employees who had in-eligible dependents listed as beneficiaries on Cablevision’s health and dental insurance policies. However, the plaintiff produced evidence that two (2) years before Cablevision’s audit, she faxed her divorce judgment to Cablevision, along with her license with her maiden name, and Cablevision was supposed to remove the in-eligible dependent. Cablevision, however, claimed that plaintiff sent the documents to the wrong department. The motion court granted summary judgment concluding that the plaintiff produced “no evidence” of discrimination.

However, in dismissing plaintiff’s case, the lower court usurped the role of the jury. In a disability discrimination case which is proceeding on an in-direct evidence path, once the plaintiff produce evidence in satisfaction of her prima facie case, and the employer produces evidence of their reason for termination, if the plaintiff produces evidence to refute the employers reasons for termination, that creates a genuine issue of material fact for a jury to determine whether the employer discriminated against the employer. In this case, only a jury, not a judge, can decide whether the plaintiff attempted to defraud Cablevision by failing to remove her ex-husband or whether Cablevision unlawfully discriminated against the plaintiff by terminating her because she took disability leave. These issues are material facts and under our court Rules, judges cannot decide material facts.

A judge’s sole role is to determine whether there are issues of material fact, and when that is found, he or she cannot determine who is wrong or right, as that is the sole function of the jury. In fact, in reversing the lower court, the Appellate Division stated that “a summary judgment motion does not present an opportunity for the judge to weigh the evidence or make credibility findings. …The judge’s essential role is to identify disputed questions of fact, assess their materiality, and determine whether a rational factfinder could resolve the disputed facts in the non-moving party’s favor.”