Dzwonar v. McDevitt

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the trial court should have precluded CEPA claim based on violation of union rules because “bylaws are not a law, rule or regulation pursuant to CEPA” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• identifying a labor union that served as the employees' collective bargaining representative as a labor organization
• discussing Judge Guido’s “inability to settle on a reason for admitting [] Nowe’s expert opinion” without alleging error
• finding plaintiffs, as matter of law, did not possess objectively reasonable belief that defendant’s conduct violated law where complaint only alleged inadequate explanation of union’s - 22 - J-S33005-19 actions to membership
• “the trial court must make a threshold determination that there is a substantial nexus between the complained-of conduct and a law or public policy[.]”
• “If the trial court . . . finds [a substantial nexus], the jury then must determine whether the plaintiff actually held such a belief and, if so, whether that belief was objectively reasonable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).