Publications — Page 17 of 50 — Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C. Firm News & Events

New Jersey Legislators Poised to Pass Recreational Marijuana Bill That May Send the Safety-Sensitive Exception up in Smoke

Published on: December 10, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

On the heels of the victory of the recreational marijuana referendum at the polls, the New Jersey Senate and Assembly moved swiftly to introduce proposed legislation regulating the use, licensing and taxation of marijuana. As of this writing the Legislature was close to sealing a deal and a vote could come as early as December 18, 2020. Despite the fact that marijuana use in the workplace has significant consequences for employers, especially those with high populations of safety sensitive workers, the most recent version of the bill is long on employee protections and short on protections for employers.

Preserved Employer Rights. Similar to the earlier Jake Honig Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act affording workplace protections to medical marijuana users, the proposed legislation provides that nothing in the Act shall be deemed to:

Restrict or preempt an employer’s right or obligation (as required for federal contractors) to maintain a drug- and alcohol-free workplace;

CDC Recommends Universal Use of Face Masks and Shortens Travel Quarantine Recommendation

Published on: December 10, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

In the face of mounting COVID-19 infection rates throughout the country, on December 4, 2020 the CDC issued a recommendation for the universal use of facemasks in indoor spaces as well as outdoor spaces when 6 feet of social distancing cannot be maintained. In addition, the CDC recommends the wearing of facemasks within households when a member of the household has been infected or had a potential exposure to the virus. The CDC noted that the proper use of facemasks is critical to reducing the spread of the virus “particularly in light of estimates that approximately one half of new infections are transmitted by persons who have no symptoms.”

The CDC also urges that exposures to “nonessential indoor settings and crowded outdoor settings pose a preventable risk to all participants” and urges continued prevention strategies such as take away service, outdoor dining and gatherings, if social distancing can be maintained, and the continued promotion of teleworking and other flexible work arrangements.

The CDC observed that increased testing, diagnosis and isolation should be implemented to interrupt the “silent transmission” of the virus from asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic persons, as well as case investigation and contract tracing to identify, quarantine and test close contacts.

CDC Issues New Guidance on Quarantine of Individuals Exposed to Persons with COVID-19

Published on: December 4, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

Until now, the CDC recommended a 14-day quarantine for individuals who might have had “close contact” with a person who has or is suspected of having COVID-19.[1] This quarantine was longer than the 10-day recommendation for those who test positive, as the longer quarantine period is based on estimates of the upper boundaries of the viral incubation period. However, in its new guidance issued December 2, 2020, the CDC acknowledged three adverse consequences of the 14-day quarantine:

It can impose personal burdens that may affect physical and mental health as well as economic hardship that may reduce compliance.
It may pose additional burdens on public health systems and communities, especially when cases are rising and the need to impose quarantines are rapidly rising.

Final “Transparency Rule” Issued for Group Health Plans and Insurers

Published on: November 30, 2020 | by James K. Estabrook and Elizabeth Engert Manzo

On October 29, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the Department of Labor (“DOL”), and Department of Treasury (“DOT”) collaborated to issue a final “transparency rule” aimed at providing greater information to consumers, thereby allowing them to explore different healthcare options and avoid surprise billing for services rendered. Additionally, the rule requires the public disclosure of negotiated rates for in-network providers and amounts allowed for out-of-network providers.

Disclosure of Provider Rates

Under the rule, non-grandfathered health plans and insurers must publish their negotiated rates and allowable out-of-network charges on a public website, which is to be updated monthly through three machine-readable files. The website must be publicly available, accessible without charge, and cannot require a user account, password, or other credentials, or submission of personally identifiable information to access the files. Specifically, the files will reflect negotiated rates for in-network services, historical payments to and billed charges from out-of-network providers, and in-network negotiated rates. The files must also show historical net prices for covered prescription drugs at the pharmacy level.

Lindabury’s Honorable Judge Katherine Dupuis (Ret.) Named as 2020 Professional Lawyer of the Year

Published on: November 18, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

We are pleased to announce the Honorable Judge Katherine Dupuis (Ret.) of Lindabury’s Alternative Dispute Resolution practice group has been named been as the 2020 Professional Lawyer of the Year by the Union County Bar Association. This award is presented to lawyers who are honored by colleagues for their exemplary conduct, competence, diligence, and demeanor.

Judge Dupuis (Ret.) concentrates her practice on mediation and arbitration in the areas of commercial disputes, probate mediation, and divorce mediation. To contact Judge Dupuis (Ret.) or to learn more about the services she offers, please click here.

3 Simple Steps Addressing Cybersecurity for Commercial Real Estate

Published on: November 3, 2020 | by Eric B. Levine

As technology associated with commercial real estate has evolved, landlords are confronted with conundrum: How to use new technologies to modernize buildings and increase profitability by attracting high quality tenants through maximizing tenant experience, while addressing the cybersecurity threats that accompany these new technologies?

The exact problem will differ based on the type of commercial property being offered by a landlord, but the overriding concern remains the same, namely, how to secure the property from cyber-security breaches. For instance, whether a landlord owns: (i) a climate controlled industrial property used for housing cloud servers, storing food or pharmaceuticals, (ii) a multi-tenant retail property with an open WIFI network and cloud-based security system, or (iii) a mixed use development with state of the art building systems, should the integrated building systems of these properties be accessed and manipulated by a hacker, it could wreak havoc on the tenants, who will seek relief from the landlord. What can a commercial landlord do today to prevent this disaster from occurring and protect its assets and reputation?

Step 1: Technology Audit

New Jersey Mandates Workplace Health and Safety Standards During COVID-19 Pandemic

Published on: October 30, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

On October 28, 2020, Governor Murphy signed Executive Order No. 192[1] providing mandatory health and safety protocols aimed at protecting New Jersey employees during the COVID-19 pandemic. The executive order, which takes effect immediately, mandates that as of 6:00 a.m. on Thursday, November 5, 2020, all employers shall be required to adhere to the protocols set forth below. Any employer found to have violated the order may be subject to closure.

Social Distancing

Employees must maintain at least six feet of distance from one another wherever possible, including but not limited to during worksite meetings, orientations and similar activities that would traditionally require individuals to be present in a single room and in close proximity, in common areas such as restrooms and breakrooms, and when individuals are entering and exiting the workplace. Where the nature of an employee’s work or the work area does not allow for six feet of distance to be maintained, employers must require their employees to wear a mask and install physical barriers between workstations wherever possible.

The Hiring Process: Best Practices and Common Pitfalls

Published on: October 29, 2020 | by Lisa Gingeleskie

Employee Recruitment

Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Employers must be mindful of recruiting and hiring with Equal Employment Opportunity principles in mind and must implement practices that ensure recruitment and hiring decisions are not based on an employee’s protected status. Applications should be screened consistently – the same standards should be applied to everyone applying for the same position. Employers should also be mindful of the possible need to accommodate applicants who need assistance because of their medical condition or religious beliefs. For example, you may need to help a person with carpal tunnel syndrome fill out an application, or you may need to reschedule an interview originally scheduled for a religious holiday if the applicant’s religious beliefs prevent her from working on that day.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act and Background Checks

Attorney Stephen A. Timoni Offers Tips and Best Practices for Telehealth

Published on: October 21, 2020 | by Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.

Lindabury attorney Stephen A. Timoni of the firm’s Health Care industry team was recently interviewed by Relias Media and offered tips and best practices for providers offering telehealth services.

Some of the topics covered in the article include:

privacy concerns due to the nontraditional electronic transmission of sensitive information among providers and patients

How Mediation Can Resolve Common Disputes That Arise During Will Probate

Published on: October 15, 2020 | by Honorable Katherine Dupuis, (Ret.)

Probate disputes often reflect the worst aspects of family law coupled with issues of undue influence.

At the time of a will probate dispute the court system is seeing the litigants at a trying period in their lives. They have lost a loved one and tensions are running high as to the actual intent of the deceased person. While the parties may be furious with one another, there is always the hope that some degree of familial ties can be preserved. Mediation is uniquely suited to resolve these tensions. The litigants can tell their sides of the story to the mediator, who has the time to listen. In my experience, it is very important for all litigants to feel as if their side of the dispute has been properly told. It is after this emotionally draining experience that they are ready to find common ground and solutions to the problems presented.

Challenges frequently arise when all heirs are not treated equally. One child may feel they had the burden of caring for the aging parent and should be compensated. A variation of this story arises when the elderly parent has given a power of attorney to only one family member. After death disputes arise as to assets that may have been spent by the child with the power of attorney. Rarely have receipts been saved, and frequently large amounts of cash have been paid to home health aide. Expensive litigation and a trial will only serve to reduce the assets. A mediator can help the parties narrow their actual disputes and discuss the cost of proving the righteousness of a position. The insight of a neutral third party is invaluable.