Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
John ROSEN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lori S. Sattler, J.), entered on or about March 31, 2023, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny dismissal of plaintiff's claim under Not–for–Profit Corporation Law § 715–b, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff fails to allege that he worked in New Jersey, as required to avail himself of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) and New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (NJCEPA) (see Goodman v. Port Auth. Of New York and New Jersey, 850 F.Supp.2d 363, 383 [S.D.N.Y.2012]). It is undisputed that plaintiff's employer, defendant Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), is based in New York and that plaintiff was hired to work out of its New York office in 2017. Plaintiff only began working out of his New Jersey home in March 2020 because of the COVID–19 pandemic (see Supino v. SUNY Downstate Med. Ctr., 2021 WL 4205181, *13, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177861, *36-38 [E.D.N.Y.2021]). In addition, plaintiff has not alleged that any of the incidents underlying his alleged whistleblower complaint to ZOA or his termination occurred in New Jersey.
However, plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a cause of action under N–PCL 715–b(a). This statute requires certain nonprofit organizations to adopt and implement whistleblower policies to protect individuals who report suspected improper conduct from retaliatory conduct and defendants failed to refute plaintiff's allegation that he was an employee rather than an officer of ZOA (see Ferris v. Lustgarten Found., 189 A.D.3d 1002, 1005–1006, 138 N.Y.S.3d 517 [2d Dept. 2020]).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 1940
Decided: March 28, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)