smith eibeler, llc christopher j. eibeler, esq. id ...€¦ · llc (who is now owned by cozen...
TRANSCRIPT
1
SMITHEIBELER,LLCChristopherJ.Eibeler,Esq.ID#031772004KathrynK.McClure,Esq.ID#037462004RobertW.Smith,Esq.ID#044341987MeghanChrisner-Keefe,Esq.ID#21052011LisaAckerlyHernandez,Esq.ID#018402005DavidJ.FranzmathesID#309432019101CrawfordsCornerRoad,Suite1-105RHolmdel,NJ07733(732)444-1300AttorneysforPlaintiff-------------------------------------------------------------X : CHRISTOPHERNEUWIRTH, : SUPERIORCOURTOFNEWJERSEY : LAWDIVISION:MERCERCOUNTY Plaintiff, : DOCKETNO.: : v. : CivilAction : STATEOFNEWJERSEY, : COMPLAINTANDJURYDEMAND ABCCOMPANIES(1-10)(fictitiousnamesof:unknownentities)andJOHN/JANEDOES :(1-10)(fictitiousnamesofunknownentities),:: Defendants.: : -------------------------------------------------------------X Plaintiff,ChristopherNeuwirth,havinganaddressof152OldClintonRoad,Flemington,
NewJersey08822 (hereafter“Plaintiff”),bywayComplaintagainstDefendants,StateofNew
Jersey,ABCCompanies(1-10)(fictitiousnamesofunknownentities)andJohn/JaneDoes(1-10)
(fictitiousnamesofunknownindividuals),saysasfollows:
FACTSCOMMONTOALLCOUNTS
A. PartiesandRelevantIndividuals
1. DefendantStateofNewJersey(the“State”)isastatewithintheUnitedStatesof
Americathatmakesandenforceslawsviaitslocalgovernment.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 1 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
2
2. State of New Jersey Department of Health (“DOH”) is a branch of the state
governmentandisresponsibleforformulatingandmanagingthestate’shealthinfrastructureby
providing statewide support services to state and local government agencies as well as the
citizensofNewJersey.
3. GovernorPhilipD.Murphy(“Murphy”),attimesrelevantherein,isaNewJersey
residentandtheGovernoroftheStateofNewJersey.
4. ColonelPatrickJ.Callahan(“Callahan”),attimesrelevantherein,isanindividual
employedbytheStateinthepositionofActingSuperintendent.
5. GeorgeHelmy(“Helmy”),attimesrelevantherein,isanindividualemployedby
theStateinthepositionoftheChiefofStafftotheGovernor.
6. MattPlatkin(“Platkin”),attimesrelevantherein,isanindividualemployedbythe
StateinthepositionoftheChiefCounseltotheGovernor.
7. HeatherTaylor,Esq.(“Taylor”)attimesrelevantherein,isanindividualemployed
bytheStateastheChiefEthicsOfficerfortheOfficeoftheGovernor.
8. JudithPersichilli(“Persichilli”),attimesrelevantherein,isanindividualemployed
bytheStateinthepositionofCommissioneroftheDOH.
9. Andrea Martinez-Mejia (Martinez-Mejia”), at times relevant herein, is an
individualemployedbytheStateinthepositionofChiefofStaffoftheDOH.
10. Joy Lindo (“Lindo”), at times relevant herein, is an individual employedby the
StateinthepositionofDivisionDirectoroftheOfficeofLegalandRegulatoryCompliance.
11. Lubna Qazi-Chowdhry (“Qazi-Chowdhry”), at times relevant herein, is an
individualemployedbytheStateinthepositionofEthicsLiaisonOfficerfortheDOH.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 2 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
3
12. KaitlynWoolford(“Woolford”),attimesrelevantherein,isanindividualemployed
by theState in thepositionof ExecutiveAssistant to theDeputyCommissionerof thePublic
HealthServicesBranchoftheDOH.
B. Plaintiff’sEmployment/ConsultingHistory
13. From2011through2013,PlaintiffwasemployedastheStateHomelandSecurity
Exercise Coordinator (Government Representative 2) for theNew JerseyOffice of Homeland
SecurityandPreparedness.
14. From2013through2016,PlaintiffworkedfortheDOHinthepositionofDirector
ofPublicHealthRecovery(GovernmentRepresentative1)andthenasanInformationSecurity
Officer(InformationTechnologySpecialist).
15. From2013through2015,PlaintiffalsoworkedforMargolisHealyandAssociates,
LLC(“MHA”).PlaintifffullydisclosedhisbusinessactivitieswithMHAtotheStateandobtained
theState’sexpressapprovaltoengagewithMHAoutsidehisjobduties,responsibilitiesandhours
workingfortheState.
16. From2016through2018,PlaintiffwasemployedinthepositionofManagerofthe
EmergencyManagementandEnterpriseResilienceforNewYorkUniversityLangoneHealth.
C. Plaintiff’sEmploymentasDOHAssistantCommissioner
17. InoraboutOctober29,2018,PlaintiffcommencedemploymentwiththeDOHas
AssistantCommissioner.
18. In thepositionofAssistantCommissionerofDOH,Plaintiffwas responsible for
providing strategic leadership and guidance to the Division of Public Health Infrastructure,
LaboratoriesandEmergencyPreparednesswhich includedapproximately250staffacross the
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 3 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
4
Offices of Disaster Resilience, Emergency Medical Services and the Public Health and
EnvironmentalLaboratories.
19. Plaintiff was also responsible for managing an operational budget of
approximately$57million,includingmorethan$28millioninfederalgrantsfromASPRandthe
CDC for the Hospital Preparedness Program and the Public Health Emergency Preparedness
program,respectively.
20. Plaintiffparticipatedincybersecuritythreatidentificationandbusinesscontinuity
activities to strengthen enterprise resilience and ensure continuity of government during a
disaster.
21. Plaintiff also partnered with the New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and
Preparednesstocompletethestatewidethreatandhazardidentificationriskassessmentforthe
healthcareandpublichealthsectors.
22. Plaintiffalsoconductedpreparednessactivitiesfornumerousongoingincidents,
crises,andpre-plannedlarge-scaleeventsacrosstheStateofNewJerseyand/orimpactingthe
northeastUnitedStates.
D. Plaintiff’sConsultingServiceswithMargolisHealyandAssociates
23. At the time he began his employment as Assistant Commissioner, Plaintiff
disclosed to the State his own company, Emergency Manager Project, LLC, (“EMP”) which
administeredtheEmergencyManager1and2courses.
24. PlaintifflicensedbothcoursestoCrossroadsEducation,LLCpriortobeginninghis
employmentwiththeDOH.
25. At no time after starting his employment with the DOH in 2018 did Plaintiff
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 4 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
5
administeranycourses.
26. Plaintiff disclosed the EMP outside activity in his 2019 Financial Disclosure
StatementformandtheOutsideActivityQuestionnaire(“OAQ”)hesubmittedattheonsetofhis
employment.
27. StateemployeesarerequiredtocompletetheFinancialDisclosureStatementon
anannualbasisanddisclose,interalia,allsourcesofincomeforthe12-monthperiodpriorto
thefiling.
28. State employees are required to complete theOAQ (1)when they commence
Stateemployment;(2)wheneverthereisachangeintheemployee’soutsideactivity;and(3)at
aminimumeverythreeyears.
29. InoraboutAugust2019,PlaintiffwascontactedbyMargolisHealyandAssociates,
LLC (who is now owned by CozenO’Connor, P.C.) (collectively herein referred to as “MHA”)
regardingaRequestforProposal(“RFP”)theywererespondingtoonbehalfofanout-of-state
universityclientofthefirm.
30. AtthetimeofPlaintiff’shiringinOctober2018,PlaintiffdidnotidentifyMHAon
hisFinancialDisclosureFormbecausehedidnotcurrentlyworkforMHA,andhadnotreceived
anyincomefromMHAinthecalendaryearprecedingthecommencementofhisemployment.
31. Contrarytorecentmediareportscausedbythefalsedisseminationofinformation
oftheState,Plaintiffhadnotworkedfor,orprovidedanyconsultingservicesto,MHAsince2016.
32. TheRFPfortheout-of-stateuniversitywasinresponsetoahighlycomplex,large-
scalecybersecurityexerciseitwasinterestedinconductinginearly2020.
33. Based upon Plaintiff’s education, training and experience, MHA expressed an
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 5 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
6
interestinincludingPlaintiffastheleadexercisedesigner/facilitatorforthisparticularRFP.
34. PlaintiffwasnottoreceiveanycompensationforbeingincludedintheRFPorby
providinghisinputtoMHAontheirdraftproposalpriortosubmission.
35. BecausetheopportunitywithMHAwouldconstituteanoutsideactivityandcould
resultinfutureengagements,PlaintiffbelievedheshoulddisclosetheopportunitytotheState
pursuanttoN.J.A.C.19:61-5.9(c).
36. In connection therewith, prior to working on any project with MHA in 2019,
PlaintiffdisclosedthespecificopportunitywithMHAtoEthicsLiaisonOfficeroftheDOH,Nancy
Kelly-Goodstein.
37. PlaintifffurthersubmittedanupdatedOAQinoraboutOctober2019tofurther
disclosetheopportunity.
38. After initially disclosing the opportunity, Plaintiff andMs. Kelly-Goodstein had
additionalconversationsconcerningtheopportunityduringwhichPlaintiffprovidedadditional
clarificationsonhisrelationshipwithbothhisowncompany,EMP,andMHA.
39. AfterdiscussingtheopportunitywithPlaintiffandreviewingtheOAQ,Ms.Kelly-
GoodsteininformedPlaintiffthattherewasnoconflictofinterest.
40. Specifically,theStatedeterminedthatbecauseneithertheDOHnorPlaintiffhad
anyregulatoryoversightofinstitutionsofhighereducation(i.e.collegesanduniversities),there
wasnoconflictofinterest.
41. Thereafter, it was widely known among state employees, including DOH
leadershipandPlaintiff’sstaff,thatPlaintiffprovidedoutsideconsultingservicestoMHA.
42. Infact,PlaintifflistedhisworkwithMHAonhisresume,Linkedinpageandopenly
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 6 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
7
discussedhisworkwithMHAtoDOHleadership.
43. At no time did anyone from the DOH question Plaintiff’s outside consulting
serviceswithMHAduringhisemploymentwiththeState.
44. AfterprovidingconsultingservicestoMHAfortheout-of-stateuniversity’sRFP
submission,MHAprovidedPlaintiffotherprojects forout-of-statehighereducationclients in
whichhewaspaidforhisservices.
45. TheworkPlaintiffperformedforMHAafter the initialRFPsubmission included
projects that only involved institutions of higher education and therefore, consistent with
Plaintiff’sdisclosuresandtheapprovedOAQ,noconflictofinteresteverarose.
46. InoraboutDecember2019,Plaintiff requestedpermission touseaccruedand
availablevacationdaysduringwhichtimeoffPlaintiffplannedtoperformsomeprojectsforMHA.
47. Ms.Woolford,Plaintiff’ssupervisoratthetime,approvedPlaintiff’srequest.
48. Atthetime,Ms.WoolfordwasemployedinthepositionofExecutiveAssistantto
theDeputyCommissionerofthePublicHealthServicesBranch.
49. Ms. Woolford was considered DOH leadership and currently serves as the
Commissioner-appointedNewJersey“COVID-19TestingCzar”responsible forcoordinatingall
aspectsofCOVID-19testingacrossNewJersey.
50. Plaintiffwascompensatedlessthan$2,000duringcalendaryear2019fromMHA.
51. Plaintiffwouldhavedisclosedalloutsideincomeheearnedfromconsultingwith
MHAonhis2020FinancialDisclosureForm,whichwouldhavebeenduebyJuly31,2020.
52. PlaintiffdidnotcompleteanyworkforanyMHAclientsoncetheState’sCOVID-
19pandemicresponsebeganonJanuary24,2020.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 7 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
8
E. COVID-19Pandemic
53. NewJersey’sresponsetothenovelcoronavirus(“COVID-19”)pandemicbeganon
January24,2020.
54. Plaintiffregularlyworkedsixteen(16)totwenty(20)hourdays,withnodaysoff
fromJanuary24,2020throughthepeakperiodofthepandemicinApril.
55. On January 27, 2020, Plaintiff established the DOH Crisis Management Team,
authorizedtheoriginalCoronavirusResponsePlan,andservedastheinitialIncidentCommander
forthestate’spandemicresponse,coordinatingallDOHactivitiesrelatedtoCOVID-19.
56. OnFebruary3,2020,GovernorMurphysignedExecutiveOrder102,creatinga
statewideCoronavirusTaskForce.
57. OnMarch9,2020,GovernorMurphydeclaredaStateofEmergencyinresponse
totheCOVID-19outbreakandPlaintiffservedastheDOHrepresentativetotheState’sUnified
Command.
58. OnMarch 10, 2020, GovernorMurphy and Commissioner Persichilli agreed to
have Plaintiff travel to Washington, D.C., to testify before the United States House of
RepresentativesHomelandSecuritySubcommitteeonEmergencyPreparedness,Responseand
Recovery.
59. Duringthehearing,Plaintiffprovidedthecommitteewithtestimonyconcerning
hisexperienceandexpertiseandhowNewJerseywaspreparingforandrespondingtothenovel
coronaviruspublichealthcrisis.
60. Plaintiff was also tasked to request additional funding from the federal
governmentanddistributionofitemsfromtheStrategicNationalStockpile,andelsewhere,on
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 8 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
9
behalfofNewJersey,whichhedidduringhistestimony.
61. Following the World Health Organization declaring COVID-19 a pandemic on
March11,2020,GovernorMurphysignednumerousExecutiveOrders,includingastay-at-home
order, the closure of non-essential businesses, retail and schools, and prohibiting all social
gatheringsandmandatingworkfromhomearrangements.
62. TherewerewidespreadshortagesofPPEandmolecular testingsuppliesas the
COVID-19pandemichitNewJersey.
63. Because of the shortage of testing, it was New Jersey’s public policy that
individuals who do not have any symptoms not be tested and that individuals with mild
symptomsstayhomewhiletheyaresickandfollowtheguidanceoftheirhealthcareprovider.
64. Testing was prioritized for individuals with symptoms of fever, cough and
shortnessofbreathsevereenoughtorequirehospitalization,thosewhowereinclosecontact
withconfirmedCOVID-19casesandindividualswhotraveledto/fromhighlyaffectedareas.
65. Testing was specifically not recommended for persons who did not have
symptoms.
66. OnoraboutApril8,2020,itwasreportedthatMr.Platkinhadtestedpositivefor
COVID-19.
67. Itwasreportedatthattime,consistentwithNewJersey’sclearmandateofpublic
policy,thatGovernorMurphyhadtwicestatedintheweeksbeforeApril8,2020thathehadnot
beentestedbecausehewasnotexperiencinganyCOVID-19symptomsandbecauseofalackof
testingsupplies.
68. OnApril9,2020,GovernorMurphyconfirmedthathehadnotbeentestedatthat
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 9 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
10
timeandthathedidnotplanongettingtestedinlightofMr.Platkin’spositivetest.
69. GovernorMurphyreasonedthathedidnothaveanysymptomsandthathedid
notgonearpeople.
70. WhenpressedbyareporterastowhyMr.Platkinwasabletoobtainatestwhen
hewasnotsymptomaticperpublicpolicy,GovernorMurphyasked,“Whydoeshegetafreepass
todothat?Weneedthisguy.”
71. OnApril10,2020,GovernorMurphyannouncedtheacquisitionof15point-of-
careIDNOWtestinginstrumentsfromthefederalgovernmenttoexpandaccesstoCOVID-19
testinginNewJersey.
72. The portable, rapid testing machines were dispersed to health care systems
throughoutthestateinanefforttoassistNewJerseytomeetthehighdemandfortesting.
73. OnMay13,2020, theStateannounced that itwouldbe investinghundredsof
millions of dollars to expand COVID-19 testing and that the tests would be prioritized for
vulnerablepopulations,theircaregiversandfrontlineworkers.
74. Atthistime,GovernorMurphysaidthathedirected$6billioninfederalfunding
toRutgersUniversitytohelpthemscaleup--asmuchasfive-fold--productionofasaliva-based
testkit,allowingittoreachasmanyas50,000peopledaily.
75. GovernorMurphy further publicly stated that therewas a need to double the
state’stestingcapacitysothatitcouldscreen20,000peopleadayforCOVID-19bytheendof
May,andthathewantedtosee25,000testsdonedailybytheendofJune.
76. GovernorMurphywasquotedassaying,“Everydaywetakeanotherstepforward
torampupourtestingabilities.Butweknowthateventhisjumpintestingisnotenough.We
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 10 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
11
need to have an even more robust testing program that is engrained throughout our
communitiesandwhichgoouttothepeopleasmuchasthepeoplecangotoit.”
F. Plaintiff’sEthicsComplaint
77. OnApril24,2020,Plaintiffreceivedamissedtelephonecalltohiscellphonefrom
ColonelCallahan.
78. Afewminuteslater,PlaintiffreturnedCallahan’sphonecall.
79. Duringthecall,CallahaninformedPlaintiffthathe“needsafavor”.
80. The“favor”wasforPlaintifforamemberofhisstafftogotothehomeofoneof
Helmy’srelativesthatweekendtocollectspecimensfromtworelativesfortestingofSARS-COV-
2tobeperformedatDOH’sPublicHealthandEnvironmentalLaboratories.
81. Plaintiff did notwant to participate in this request because, in his reasonable
belief, the actions were unethical, unlawful, incompatible with public policy, a misuse of
governmentalresourcesand/ormisuseofpower.
82. However,fullyunderstandingthattherequestforthe“favor”wascomingfrom
top-levelpeoplewithintheGovernor’sinnercircle,PlaintiffrespondedtoCallahanthathewould
lookintoitandchecktoseeifhehadstaffavailable.
83. Callahan instructed Plaintiff that the testing could occur anytime over the
weekend,eitherSaturdayorSunday.
84. Attheendoftheconversation,PlaintiffrequestedCallahantotexthimthedetails,
whichhedid.
85. Shortly after the phone call ended, Callahan sent the textmessage to Plaintiff
confirmingtheinstruction.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 11 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
12
86. ThefollowingdayonApril25,2020,CallahancalledPlaintiffandangrilydemanded
whynoonehadcontactedHelmy’srelativesandperformedthetestsyet.
87. Plaintiffrespondedthathehadnostaffavailable.
88. Callahanthenasked,“Sothen,thisissomethingyouaregoingtodo?”
89. Plaintiffresponded,“Yea,Idon’thaveachoice.”
90. Callahanresponded,“ThanksChris.Iwillletherknow.”
91. FollowinghiscommunicationswithCallahan,PlaintiffwroteanemailtoDOHChief
ofStaff,AndreaMeija-Martinez,todisclosetheimproperrequestandcomplainthathewasbeing
instructedtoperformaprivateCOVID-19testonrelativesofaGovernor’sOfficeemployeeas“a
favor”.
92. TheApril25,2020emailtoMs.Martinez-Mejiareads,inrelevantpart:
Clearly,we cannot say no, or advise them that this test doesn’tmatter,andit’sacompletewasteofanAC’stimetospendliterally6-hourscollectingonespecimen.I’msharing thiswithyousimply fordocumentationand, incase,thiscontinuestospiraloutofcontrol.
93. OnApril26,2020,at9:00a.m.PlaintiffreceivedatextmessagefromCallahanwith
furtherinstructionsconcerningthe“favor.”
94. OnApril26at10:53a.m.,Ms.Martinez-MejiarespondedtoPlaintiff’semailas
follows,“ThankyouChris.IwilldiscussthiswithCommissioner.”
95. On April 26, Plaintiff travelled from his home to the Public Health and
EnvironmentalLaboratoriesinWestTrentontoobtainspecimencollectiontubes.
96. Thereafter, Plaintiff drove to theHealth andAgricultureBuilding in Trenton to
retrievehisstatevehicle.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 12 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
13
97. A fewminutes laterat11:02a.m.,Plaintiff responded toMs.Martinez-Mejia’s
emailandstated,“I’mdrivinguptherenow.”
98. WhilePlaintiffwasintheprocessofobtaininghisstatevehicle,PlaintiffcalledJoy
LindofromtheDOHOfficeofLegalandRegulatoryCompliancetocomplainanddisclosetoher
thathehadbeeninstructedtoperformprivateCOVID-19testsonrelativesofaGovernor’sOffice
employeeas“afavor”,whichhereasonablybelievedwasunethical,unlawful,incompatiblewith
publicpolicy,amisuseofgovernmentalresourcesand/ormisuseofpower.
99. Ms.LindoagreedwithPlaintiff.
100. Specifically, Ms. Lindo concluded to Plaintiff that, “[t]his is a textbook ethics
violation.”
101. Ms.LindofurtherdirectedPlaintifftopulloveronthesideoftheroad,whileshe
calledCommissionerPersichillitodiscusshiscomplaintsanddisclosuresconcerningthesituation
directlywithher.
102. Soonthereafter,Ms.LindocalledPlaintiffandinformedhimthatsherelayedhis
complaintstoCommissionerPersichilli.
103. Ms.LindaalsoinformedPlaintiffthatCommissionerPersichillitoldherthatMs.
Martinez-Mejianever sentPlaintiff’semail toCommissionerPersichilli,nordidMs.Martinez-
Mejia ever speak with Commissioner Persichilli about Plaintiff’s complaints and disclosures
concerningthesituation.
104. Ms.LindoinstructedPlaintifftonotproceedwiththespecimencollectionandto
gohome.
105. WhileenroutebacktoTrenton,Plaintiffdroppedoffhisstatevehicleandcalled
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 13 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
14
CommissionerPersichillitodiscussthesituation.
106. Plaintiff told the Commissioner about his conversation with Ms. Lindo and
CommissionerPersichilliconfirmedherinstructionforPlaintifftogohomeandnotperformthe
testontherelatives.
107. OnApril27,PlaintiffcalledtheStateEthicshotlinetoformally lodgeanethical
complaintconcerningthesituation.
108. However,noonefromtheStateEthicshotlineansweredthecallanditwenttoa
voicemail.
109. Thereafter,PlaintiffspoketoMs.Lindoaboutthebestmethodofcontactforthe
StateEthicsCommissionashehadpreviouslyattemptedtomakecontactonApril27.
110. PlaintiffinformedMs.LindothattherewasnoanswerattheStateEthicshotline
anddidnotfeelcomfortableleavingamessageonanunidentifiedvoicemail.
111. Inresponse,Ms.LindosuggestedthatPlaintiffcontacttheDOH’sinternalethics
officer,LubnaQazi-Chowdhry.
112. Thereafter,atelephonemeetingbetweenMs.Qazi-ChowdhryandPlaintiffwas
scheduledforMay14todiscusshisethicscomplaint.
113. In preparation for the meeting on May 14, Plaintiff attached screenshots of
Callahan’stextmessagetothemeetinginvitation.
114. During the call, Plaintiff complained to Ms. Qazi-Chowdry that he had been
instructedtoperformprivateCOVID-19testsonrelativesofaGovernor’sOfficeemployeeas“a
favor”,whichhereasonablybelievedwasunethical,unlawful,incompatiblewithpublicpolicy,a
misuseofgovernmentalresourcesand/ormisuseofpower.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 14 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
15
115. AfterlisteningtoPlaintiff’scomplaint,Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryrespondedtoPlaintiff’s
complaintbystatingthatshewouldnotbethepersontohandleitbecausethesituationinvolved
misconductofhighrankingindividualswithintheGovernor’sOffice.
116. Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryfurthertoldPlaintiffthatshewouldhavetospeakwiththe
StateEthicsCommissiontodeterminethebestwaytohandlethecomplaint,andthatshewould
contactPlaintiffbytheendofthedaywithfurtherinstructiononhowheshouldproceed.
117. Laterthatday,Ms.Qazi-ChowdrycalledPlaintiff.
118. Duringthiscall,Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryinformedPlaintiffthatshehadspokentothe
StateEthicsCommissionand instructedPlaintiff that“youneedtohaveaconsultationwitha
lawyer”beforeproceedingwithprocessingthecomplaint.
119. Plaintiff was completely taken aback by Ms. Qazi-Chowdhry’s direction and
responsetohercomplaints.
120. Plaintiffresponded,“okay”,andtheconversationthenended.
121. Thefollowingday,PlaintiffcalledMs.Qazi-Chowdrytoasktwoquestionstoclarify
herinstructionsfromthedayprior.
122. The first question Plaintiff asked: “what kind of lawyer were you suggesting I
consultwith”andthesecond:“whatamIsupposedtotellthem?”
123. Ms.Qazi-Chowdhryrespondedtothefirstquestion,a“criminaldefenselawyer.”
124. Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryrespondedtothesecondquestionbyinstructingPlaintiffhave
thecriminaldefenselawyerexplainthe“consequencesofsubmittingtheethicscomplaint.”
125. BaseduponMs.Qazi-Chowdhry’simplicationofcriminalrepercussionsifPlaintiff
went forward with the complaint, Plaintiff asked Ms. Qazi-Chowdhry whether “this [his
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 15 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
16
complaint]isdeadinthewater?”
126. Addressing the threatof criminal repercussions,Plaintiff further stated thathe
had small children andmay not want to proceed with the complaint if he was going to be
criminallyprosecutedbecauseofit.
127. Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryrespondedbyassuringPlaintiffthatshewouldnotprocessthe
complaintuntilafterhespokewithacriminaldefenselawyer.
128. This conversation confirmed Plaintiff’s initial concern that he was being
threateningwithcriminalrepercussionsshouldhegoforwardwiththeethicscomplaint.
129. Thefollowingweek,Ms.Qazi-ChowdhryandPlaintiffhadanothercommunication
abouttheprocessingofthecomplaint.
130. During the conversation, Ms. Qazi-Chowdhry asked Plaintiff if he had the
opportunitytomeetwithacriminaldefenselawyer.
131. Plaintiff responded affirmatively and that after speaking with the criminal
attorney,hewascomfortablethathedidnotdoanythingwrongandcertainlynothingcriminal.
132. Ms.Qazi-Chowdhryresponded,“Okay,good.”
133. PlaintiffaskedMs.Qazi-Chowdhryforfurtherclarificationabouthiscomplaintand
howitwouldproceed.
134. Ms. Qazi-Chowdhry responded that she would not be handling his ethics
complaintandwouldnotprovideadirectanswertoanyofhisquestionsaboutthenextstepsin
processingthecomplaint.
135. FollowingthislastcommunicationwithMs.Qazi-Chowdry,seniorstaffremoved
scheduledmeetings with Plaintiff from his calendar, refused to share information with him,
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 16 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
17
wouldnotrespondtohisemailsandwouldnotparticipateinscheduledmeetingswithhim.
136. Plaintiffwasnolongerconsultedonimportantmatters,includingthereceiptand
distribution of remdesivir to hospitals and the $613 million Epidemiology and Laboratory
Capacity for Prevention and Control of Emerging Infectious Diseases (ELC) cooperative
agreementgrant.
137. Additionally,Plaintiffstoppedreceivingcommunicationsfromotherseniorstaff
members including,butnot limited to,CommissionerPersichilli,Ms.Martinez-MejiaandMs.
Woolford.
138. On May 19, 2020, Plaintiff received an email meeting invitation from the
Commissioner’sExecutiveAssistant,DeeMorris, tomeetwith the“staff fromtheGovernor's
Office”scheduledforMay20,2020from3:30p.m.to4:30p.m.
139. PlaintiffrespondedtoMs.Morris’emailandaskedwhichstaffwouldbeattending
themeeting.
140. Plaintiffreceivednoresponsetothisemail.
141. OnMay20,2020,Plaintiffattendedameetingwithtwoattorneysfromtheoffice
oftheGovernor,oneofwhomwastheChiefEthicsOfficer,HeatherTaylor.
142. Duringthemeeting,theattorneysaskedPlaintiffifhewasawareofanewsarticle
citing to anonymous sources, about recording the Commissioner in meetings and leaking
confidentialinformationtothemedia.
143. Specifically,Plaintiffwasaskedifheknewofthenewsreporterand/orifhehad
anycontactwiththenewsreporter.
144. Plaintiff stated thathedidnot speakorprovideany information toanymedia
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 17 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
18
memberandthathedidnotknowwhowasdoingso.
145. ThepurportedinvestigationtakenintotheallegedleaksfromwithintheDOHto
themediawas not completed fairly, thoroughly or completely as required by state law and
regulations.
146. OnMay28,2020at10:30a.m.,PlaintiffwasinformedbytheDirectorofHuman
Resourcesthathewasterminated.
147. WhenPlaintiffasked ifhis terminationwas forcauseorno-cause,Plaintiffwas
informeditwasa“no-causetermination”andthathis“serviceswerenolongerneeded.”
148. As a result of the harassing and discriminatory conduct, Plaintiff has suffered
emotional distress and continues to experience ongoing emotional distress and significant
economicdamages.
F. Plaintiff’sDueProcessRights
149. Contrarytowhathewastoldasthereasonforhistermination,thepublicposition
beingtakenbytheStateisthatthereasonforPlaintiff’sterminationwasbecausehefailedto
properlydisclosehisconsultingworkforMHAandthathedidnotobtainappropriateapproval
todoso.
150. ThispositionisdemonstrablyfalseandeasilyverifiablebyStaterecords.
151. At no time prior to his termination, or during his termination discussions, did
anyone from the State ever accuse Plaintiff of failing to disclose his outside employment
relationshipwithMHA.
152. Plaintiff was never informed of any ethics investigation being conducted
concerningPlaintiff’soutsidebusinessactivities.
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 18 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
19
153. Plaintiff’sterminationhasbeenthesubjectofnumerousmediareportsinwhich
anonymouspersonsassociatedwiththeStateand/orGovernor’sOfficebegandisclosingfalse
anddefamatoryinformationconcerningPlaintiff,Plaintiff’semploymentwiththeStateandthe
purportedreasonsforhistermination.
154. In these reports, anonymous sources of the State claim that Plaintiff was
terminated“forcause.”
155. AnonymoussourcesoftheStatefurthertoldnewsoutletsthatPlaintiffbecame
“overloaded”withworkathis“otherjob”atMHA.
156. TheallegationthatPlaintiffwasever“overloaded”withhisworkathis“otherjob”
atMHAisfalseanddefamatory.
157. AnothernewsstoryreportedthatanonymoussourceshavestatedthatPlaintiff
facedcriticismforpoorattendanceattheDOHpost.
158. TheallegationthatPlaintifffacedcriticismforpoorattendanceattheDOHpostis
alsofalseanddefamatory.
159. Uponinformationandbelief,theStatehasnotconductedanyinvestigationinto
theidentificationofanyoftheanonymoussourceswhohavebeenleakingfalseanddefamatory
informationaboutPlaintifftothemedia.
160. Instead, the State has publicly made general comments about Plaintiff’s
terminationthatessentiallyendorsethedefamatorystatements.
161. The statementshave caused thepublic tobelieve the leaks aboutPlaintiff are
credible.
162. For example, when asked about Plaintiff’s termination, Governor Murphy
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 19 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
20
perpetuatedthefalsehoodsbeingdisseminatedby“anonymous”sourcesbystating,“Folksare
not–it’sparforthecoursethatyou’renotsupposedtohaveanothersourceofincome…”
163. Afewdays later,GovernorMurphywasagainquoted inresponsetoquestions
aboutPlaintiff’stermination,“Idon’thaveagoodansweraboutanyoneelsewhomayhavea
secondjob,butthereisaprocessandIdon’tthinkIaddresseditascrisplyasIcouldhave.”
164. Governor Murphy further stated, “Someone has to declare themselves and
see[k][sic]basicallyanexemptionorwaiver.”
165. Governor Murphy’s public adoption of the falsehoods being pushed by
“anonymoussources”haveseverelydamagedPlaintiff’soncestellarprofessionalreputation.
166. Mr.PlatkinhasalsobeenattributedtofalsereportsthatPlaintiffviolatedethical
rulesbyfailingtodisclosehisconsultingservicestoMHA.
167. Forexample,onearticlereported,“ChiefCounselMattPlatkinsaidthatthereare
certainclassesofstateemployeeswhoarenotpermittedtoearnoutsideincomeandotherswho
mustgettheapprovaloftheStateEthicsCommission.”
168. Itfurtherreads,“Platkinsaidthattherearecertainclassesofstateemployeeswho
arenotpermittedtoearnoutsideincomeandothersmustgettheapprovaloftheStateEthics
Commission.Platkinsaidiftheemployeedidreceiveapproval,theywouldstillhavetodisclose
outsideincomeandotherswhomustgettheapprovaloftheStateEthicsCommission.”
169. Themisrepresentationsoftheanonymoussources,andendorsementofsameby
stateemployees,includingGovernorMurphyandMr.Platkin,havecausedotherpoliticiansto
callforaninvestigationintoPlaintiffandtherelationshipbetweentheDOHandMHA.
170. Assemblyman Christopher DePhillips, who asked the State Commission of
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 20 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
21
Investigation and the State Controller to launch an investigation, was quoted, “A troubling
patternofethicsbreacheshasbeenemergingfromtheDepartmentofHealth,anditcallsfora
thoroughandswiftinvestigation.ThepeopleofourstatedeservetoknowiftheirStateHealth
Departmenthasbeenabusingethicalandtransparencyprotocols,especiallyduringtheongoing
pandemic.”
171. Plaintiff’s reputation has been and continues to be severely damaged by the
State’sdefamatoryandretaliatoryconduct.
172. Prior to his termination, no one from theGovernor’sOffice or the State ever
confronted Plaintiff regarding any accusation of impropriety concerning his association with
MHA.
173. NoinvestigationwaseverconductedintoPlaintiff’sdisclosuresofhisassociation
withMHA.
174. Plaintiffwastoldthathisterminationwasnotforcauseandwasneverprovided
anyopportunitytodefendhimselfagainstthesefalseallegations.
175. If theStatehadaffordedPlaintiffhisdueprocess rightsunderapplicable state
regulations,thefactssurroundinghisworkwithMHAwouldhavebeenfullyknownandtheState
wouldhaveclearedPlaintiffofanysuspectedwrongdoing.
176. Plaintiff would have also been able to explain thatMHA erroneously kept his
profilepageposted,whichstatedthatheworkedforthemfor“twoyears.”
177. Infact,asimple“WayBackMachine”internetarchivesearchoftheMHAwebsite
reflects that as of December 31, 2015, Plaintiff’s profile reads, “Chris as [sic] aManager of
EmergencyManagementServicesatMargolisHealyfortwoyears.”
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 21 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
22
178. The informationthatPlaintiffwasaManageratMHAfor“twoyears”wastrue
whenitwasfirstpublishedinoraboutmidtolate2015,butisobviouslyuntruefive(5)years
laterinMay2020.
179. Upon information and belief,MHA’s profile link of Plaintiff was leaked to the
mediatosupportthefalseassertionthatPlaintiffhasbeenworkingatMHAfortheimmediate
precedingtwoyears.
180. Contrarytothenewsreports,anonymoussourcesandcallsforinvestigationsfrom
politicalfoesofGovernorMurphy,Plaintiff’spriorprofilepagethatidentifiedhimasworkingfor
MHAasa“ManagerofEmergencyManagementServicesatMargolisHealyfortwoyears”was
mistakenlyneverupdatedorremovedfromMHA’swebsite.
181. ThePlaintiff’sdueprocessrightsinthefaceofanallegationofanethicsviolation
aredescribed indetail in theNew JerseyConflictsof Interest Law,N.J.S.A.52:13D-12et seq.
(ConflictsLaw)andontheStateEthicsCommission’swebsite.
182. Allegations of wrongdoing are received by the Ethics Commission from many
sources,includingStateemployeesormembersofthepublic,andcanbemadeviaaphonecall
totheEthicsCommissionhotlineorinwriting.
183. ComplaintstotheEthicsCommissioncanbemadeanonymous.
184. AllegationsofwrongdoingmayalsobefiledwiththeStateagencyemployingthe
Stateofficeroremployeeinaccordancewithproceduresestablishedbytheagency.
185. As it relates to Plaintiff, an allegation would properly be filed with the Ethics
CommissionortheDOH.
186. Uponreceiptofanallegation,theDOHisrequiredtofiletheallegationwiththe
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 22 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
23
EthicsCommission.
187. AlldeterminationsbytheDOHwithrespecttotheConflictsLawwhichinvolvethe
removalofaStateofficeroremployeeoranyotherdisciplinaryactionsareeffectiveonlywhen
approvedbytheEthicsCommission.
188. WhentheEthicsCommissionreceivesanallegation,thestafffirstreviewsitforan
initial determination as to whether the alleged conduct falls within the jurisdiction of the
Commission.
189. Upon informationandbelief,noallegationsofwrongdoinghavebeenmadeto
eithertheEthicsCommissionortheDOHregardingPlaintiff.
190. IftheEthicsCommissiondeterminesthatithasjurisdictionoveranallegation,the
Commission initiates a preliminary investigation, whichmay include a review of documents,
interviewsofthecomplainant,theStateofficeroremployeeinvolved,andanyotherindividuals
whopossessknowledgeofthecircumstancessurroundingtheallegedconduct.
191. Anyinterviewsconductedareunderoathandrecorded,andtheintervieweehas
therighttobeaccompaniedbyanattorney.
192. Uponinformationandbelief,nopreliminaryinvestigationwasconductedbythe
EthicsCommissionortheDOHinregardstoPlaintiff’sworkwithMHA.
193. Upon the conclusion of a preliminary investigation, a written report of the
investigationispresentedatanEthicsCommissionmeeting.
194. Thesubjectofaninvestigationisnotified,inwriting,ofthedatethatthematter
willbepresentedtoandconsideredbytheEthicsCommission.
195. Thesubjectandhis/herattorneyhavetherighttobepresentattheCommission
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 23 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
24
meeting.
196. Plaintiff never received notice of an Ethics Commissionmeeting at which any
allegationsagainsthimwouldbereviewed.
197. If the Ethics Commission determines that there are indications of a violation
meriting further proceedings, a complaint is issued and the case is referred to theOffice of
AdministrativeLaw(“OAL”)forafulldueprocesshearingpursuanttotherequirementsofthe
Administrative Procedure Act, N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 et seq., and the Uniform Administrative
ProcedureRules,N.J.A.C.1:1.
198. AftertheOALhearingisconcluded,theAdministrativeLawJudge(“ALJ”)issuesan
initialdecisioninaccordancewiththetimeframesetforthintheAdministrativeProcedureAct.
199. TheEthicsCommissionultimatelyissuesaFinalOrder,inwhichtheCommission
mayaccept,rejectormodifytheALJ’sinitialdecision.
200. The subject of the complaint has the right to appeal Final Orders of the
CommissiontotheSuperiorCourt,AppellateDivision.
201. PlaintiffneverreceivednoticeofanyOALhearing,ALJdecisionorFinalOrderof
theEthicsCommissionregardinganyallegedviolations.
202. Alternatively, the Ethics Commission may permit the subject of an ethics
investigationtoenterintoaconsentagreementwiththeCommissioneitherpriortoorafterthe
issuanceofacomplaint.
203. Consentordersareretainedinanindividual’spersonnelfile.
204. Consentorders,complaintsandanswersarepublicrecords.
205. Consent orders and other final agency decisions are posted on the Ethics
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 24 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
25
Commission’swebsite.
206. Nothing has been posted to the Ethics Commission’s website in reference to
Plaintiff.
207. Despitetheforegoing,Defendantscontinuetodisseminatefalseanddefamatory
information concerning Plaintiff to the public and through anonymous sources to damage
Plaintiffandfurtherretaliateagainsthimforengaginginprotectedactivity.
208. Asaresultoftheforegoing,Plaintiffhasbeendeniedhisrighttodueprocessand
hassufferedseverereputational,economicandemotionaldistressdamages.
FIRSTCOUNT
CONSCIENTIOUSEMPLOYEEPROTECTIONACT(“CEPA”)
N.J.S.A.34:19-1etseq.
209. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations of the within
Complaintasifsetforthatlengthherein.
210. Plaintiff’s disclosures, complaints and/or objections toDefendants concerning
beinginstructedtoperformaprivateCOVID-19testonrelativesofaGovernor’sOfficeemployee
as“afavor”constitutesprotectedactivityunderCEPA.
211. Plaintiffreasonablybelievedsuchconductwasunethical,unlawful,incompatible
withpublicpolicy,amisuseofgovernmentalresourcesand/ormisuseofpower.
212. The adverse employment actions taken against Plaintiff, including the
terminationofPlaintiff’semploymentanddenialofhisdueprocessrightsunderapplicablestate
lawandregulation,was in retaliation forPlaintiff’scomplaints,disclosuresandobjections to
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 25 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
26
conduct he reasonably believed was unethical, unlawful, incompatible with public policy, a
misuseofgovernmentalresourcesand/ormisuseofpower.
213. Defendants’conductwasinviolationofCEPA.
214. Defendantsengagedin,participatedin,condoned,ratified,perpetuatedand/or
aidedandabettedtheCEPAviolations.
215. Defendants’ conduct and actions were malicious and/or undertaken with a
wantonandwillfuldisregardofandforPlaintiff.
216. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress,
compensatoryandotherdamages.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffdemandsjudgmentagainstDefendants,jointlyandseverally,for
harmsufferedasaresultoftheviolationsofCEPA,N.J.S.A.34:19-1,etseq.,asfollows:
A. Reinstatement;
B Backpayandbenefits;
C. Frontpayandbenefits;
D. Compensatorydamages;
E. Consequentialdamages;
F. Punitivedamages;
G. Equitablerelief;
H. DeclaringthatDefendantshaveviolatedCEPAandrequiringDefendantstotake
appropriatecorrectiveactiontoendunlawfulretaliationintheworkplace;
I. Pre-judgmentinterestandenhancementstooff-setnegativetaxconsequences;
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 26 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
27
J. Anyandallattorneys’fees,expensesand/orcosts,including,butnotlimitedto,
court costs, expert fees and all attorneys’ fees incurred by Plaintiff in the
prosecution of this suit (including enhancements thereof required to off-set
negative tax consequences and/or enhancements otherwise permitted under
law);and
K. Such other relief as may be available and which the Court deems just and
equitable.
SECONDCOUNT
CEPA--POST-TERMINATIONRETALIATION
217. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations of thewithin the
Complaintasifsetforthatlengthherein.
218. After unlawfully terminating Plaintiff’s employment for engaging in whistle-
blowingactivity,DefendantstookfurtherretaliatoryactionagainstPlaintiffbydefamingPlaintiff
andmisrepresentingtothepublichisperformance,attendanceandreasonsfortermination.
219. DefendantsfurthermisrepresentedtothepublicthatPlaintiffdidnotproperly
disclosehisoutsidebusinessactivitieswithMHA.
220. DefendantsfurthermisrepresentedtothepublicthatPlaintiffengagedinand/or
participatedincertainleaksconcerningtheState’sresponsetotheCOVID-19pandemic.
221. The reported “anonymous” sources of this false and defamatory information
wereindividualsoftheGovernor’sOfficeand/orotherstateemployeesorrepresentatives.
222. GovernorMurphyandPlatkinaidedandabettedthepost-terminationretaliatory
conductthroughtheirpublicstatementstoquestionsposedtothemconcerningthereasonsfor
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 27 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
28
Plaintiff’stermination,setforthherein.
223. Byendorsingtheanonymous leaks, theStatehascausedthepublictobelieve
thatPlaintiffwasterminatedforethicalreasons,whichisnottrueandhascausedPlaintiffto
sufferirreparableharm.
224. Assetforthabove,Defendantsprovidedfalseanddefamatoryinformationtothe
mediatodamagePlaintiff’sstellarprofessionalreputationandtofurtherretaliateagainsthim
forengaginginprotectedactivity.
225. Thepost-termination retaliatoryactions takenbyDefendantsagainstPlaintiff
areinviolationofCEPA.
226. Defendants’actsoromissionswerethecauseofPlaintiff’sharmandDefendants’
acts or omissions were actuated by actualmalice or accompanied by a wanton and willful
disregardofpersonswhoforeseeablymightbeharmedbythoseactsoromissions.
227. AsadirectandproximateresultofDefendants’violationofCEPA,Plaintiffhas
sufferedcompensatory,emotionaldistressandotherdamages.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffdemandsjudgmentagainstDefendantsforharmsuffereddueto
theaforesaidviolationofCEPAasfollows:
A. Reinstatement;
B Backpayandbenefits;
C. Frontpayandbenefits;
D. Compensatorydamages;
E. Consequentialdamages;
F. Punitivedamages;
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 28 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
29
G. Equitablerelief;
H. DeclaringthatDefendantshaveviolatedCEPAandrequiringDefendantstotake
appropriatecorrectiveactiontoendunlawfulretaliationintheworkplace;
I. Pre-judgmentinterestandenhancementstooff-setnegativetaxconsequences;
J. Anyandallattorneys’fees,expensesand/orcosts,including,butnotlimitedto,
court costs, expert fees and all attorneys’ fees incurred by Plaintiff in the
prosecution of this suit (including enhancements thereof required to off-set
negative tax consequences and/or enhancements otherwise permitted under
law);and
K. Such other relief as may be available and which the Court deems just and
equitable.
SMITHEIBELER,LLC By: ___________________ CHRISTOPHERJ.EIBELERDated:June16,2020 AttorneysforPlaintiff
CERTIFICATION
PursuanttoRule4:5-1,itisherebystatedtothebestofmyknowledgeandbeliefthatthe
matterincontroversyisnotthesubjectofanyotheractionpendinginanyothercourtorofa
pendingarbitrationproceeding,
SMITHEIBELER,LLC By: __________________ CHRISTOPHERJ.EIBELERDated:June16,2020 AttorneysforPlaintiff
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 29 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
30
JURYDEMAND
Plaintiffherebydemandstrialbyjuryonallissuessotriable.
SMITHEIBELER,LLC By: ________________________ CHRISTOPHERJ.EIBELERDated:June16,2020 AttorneysforPlaintiff
DESIGNATIONOFTRIALCOUNSEL
PursuanttoRule4:25-4,CHRISTOPHERJ.EIBELER,Esq.isdesignatedastrialcounselfor
theabove-captionedmatter.
SMITHEIBELER,LLC By: _____________________ CHRISTOPHERJ.EIBELERDated:June16,2020 AttorneysforPlaintiff
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 30 of 30 Trans ID: LCV20201062964
Civil Case Information Statement
Case Details: MERCER | Civil Part Docket# L-001083-20
Case Caption: NEUWIRTH CHRIS VS STATE OF NEW
JERSEY
Case Initiation Date: 06/16/2020
Attorney Name: CHRISTOPHER J EIBELER
Firm Name: SMITH EIBELER LLC
Address: 101 CRAWFORDS CORNER RD STE 1-105R
HOLMDEL NJ 07733
Phone: 7324441300
Name of Party: PLAINTIFF : NEUWIRTH, CHRIS
Name of Defendant’s Primary Insurance Company (if known): Unknown
THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS FORM CANNOT BE INTRODUCED INTO EVIDENCECASE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING IF CASE IS APPROPRIATE FOR MEDIATION
Do parties have a current, past, or recurrent relationship? YES
If yes, is that relationship: Employer/Employee
Does the statute governing this case provide for payment of fees by the losing party? YES
Use this space to alert the court to any special case characteristics that may warrant individual management or accelerated disposition:
Do you or your client need any disability accommodations? NOIf yes, please identify the requested accommodation:
Will an interpreter be needed? NOIf yes, for what language:
Please check off each applicable category: Putative Class Action? NO Title 59? NO Consumer Fraud? NO
I certify that confidential personal identifiers have been redacted from documents now submitted to the court, and will be redacted from all documents submitted in the future in accordance with Rule 1:38-7(b)
06/16/2020Dated
/s/ CHRISTOPHER J EIBELERSigned
Case Type: WHISTLEBLOWER / CONSCIENTIOUS EMPLOYEE
PROTECTION ACT (CEPA)
Document Type: Complaint with Jury Demand
Jury Demand: YES - 6 JURORS
Is this a professional malpractice case? NO
Related cases pending: NO
If yes, list docket numbers: Do you anticipate adding any parties (arising out of same transaction or occurrence)? NO
Are sexual abuse claims alleged by: CHRIS NEUWIRTH? NO
MER-L-001083-20 06/16/2020 12:26:30 PM Pg 1 of 1 Trans ID: LCV20201062964