New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 10:5-3 (2026)

Findings, declarations

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

3. The Legislature finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any of its inhabitants, because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, gender identity or expression, affectional or sexual orientation, marital status, familial status, liability for service in the Armed Forces of the United States, disability, nationality, or source of lawful income used for rental or mortgage payments, are matters of concern to the government of the State, and that such discrimination threatens not only the rights and proper privileges of the inhabitants of the State but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic State; provided, however, that nothing in this expression of policy prevents the making of legitimate distinctions between citizens and aliens when required by federal law or otherwise necessary to promote the national interest.

The Legislature further declares its opposition to such practices of discrimination when directed against any person by reason of the race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, gender identity or expression, affectional or sexual orientation, marital status, liability for service in the Armed Forces of the United States, disability, nationality, or source of lawful income used for rental or mortgage payments of that person or that person's family members, partners, members, stockholders, directors, officers, managers, superintendents, agents, employees, business associates, suppliers, or customers, in order that the economic prosperity and general welfare of the inhabitants of the State may be protected and ensured.

The Legislature further finds that because of discrimination, people suffer personal hardships, and the State suffers a grievous harm. The personal hardships include: economic loss; time loss; physical and emotional stress; and in some cases severe emotional trauma, illness, homelessness, or other irreparable harm resulting from the strain of employment controversies; relocation, search, and moving difficulties; anxiety caused by lack of information, uncertainty, and resultant planning difficulty; career, education, family, and social disruption; and adjustment problems, which particularly impact those protected by this act. Such harms have, under the common law, given rise to legal remedies, including compensatory and punitive damages. The Legislature intends that such damages be available to all persons protected by this act and that this act shall be liberally construed in combination with other protections available under the laws of this State.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 89 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Miller v. Beneficial Mgmt. Corp., 855 F. Supp. 691 (D.N.J. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Miller v. Beneficial Mgmt. Corp., 855 F. Supp. 691 (D.N.J. 1994). · cites it 10× “27 N.J.S.A. § 10:5-3 (emphasis added). This statute recognizes the noneconomic nature of many of the injuries sustained by NJLAD plaintiffs.”

David F. Calabotta Vs. Phibro Animal Health Corp. (l-1979-17, Bergen Cnty. & Statewide), 213 A.3d 210 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). · cites it 2× “The preamble, found at N.J.S.A. 10:5-3, states in relevant part: The Legislature finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any of its inhabitants, because of .”

Milagros Roman Vs. Bergen Logistics, LLC (l-2652-17, Bergen Cnty. & Statewide), 192 A.3d 1029 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018). · cites it 3× “See N.J.S.A. 10:5-3 (providing for the recovery of punitive damages for LAD claims).”

Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ., 211 A.3d 1226 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). · cites it 2× “N.J.S.A. 10:5-3 provides: The Legislature further finds that because of discrimination, people suffer personal hardships, and the State suffers a grievous harm.”

Viscik v. Fowler Equip. Co., Inc., 800 A.2d 826 (N.J. 2002). “2d 486 (1982) (citing N.J.S.A 10:5-3 & N.J.S.A. 10:5-4). In furtherance of its goals, LAD has evolved to encompass various forms of discrimination.”

Sandom v. Travelers Mortg. Servs., Inc., 752 F. Supp. 1240 (D.N.J. 1990). · cites it 3× “Indeed, in section 10:5-3 of the New Jersey Law *1246 Against Discrimination, the New Jersey-legislature has declared that practices of discrimination against [New Jersey] inhabitants, because of .”

Hawes v. Johnson & Johnson, 940 F. Supp. 697 (D.N.J. 1996). · cites it 3× “N.J.S.A 10:5-3. When the two statutes are construed together, I conclude that an executor of an estate may be substituted as a party in an action for discrimination under LAD and recover compensatory and punitive damages.”

Presbytery of New Jersey of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church v. Florio, 902 F. Supp. 492 (D.N.J. 1995). · cites it 4× “” N.J.S.A. § 10:5-3. Similarly, the New Jersey Supreme Court has stated that: The Law Against Discrimination, and the constitutional precepts of equal rights which it vindicates, reflect a pervasive public policy.”

65 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 959, 29 fed.r.serv.3d 821 Peter McKenna Greg Spina Jack Ricciardi John Oliver Andrew Hennessey Al Armetta Pincus Cohen Dave Quaid Adam Lukasweski William Harper Dorrance A. Lindh John Gugliotta George Whitehead John Shea Anthony Nazare Robert Tighe Dennis McCarthy Richard Montacalvo Jeanette McCafferty George Martin Ralph Fernandez Paul Noethe Patricia Burwitz Michael Demone Eddie Dechert Salvatore Petruzzelli Phyllis Lindh Joseph K. Pfeil v. Pac. Rail Serv., Pac. Rail Serv., Nos. 93-5253 & 93-5385. Peter McKenna Greg Spina Jack Ricciardi John Oliver Andrew Hennessey Al Armetta Pincus Cohen Dave Quaid Adam Lukasweski William Harper Dorrance A. Lindh John Gugliotta George Whitehead John Shea Anthony Nazare Robert Tighe Dennis McCarthy Richard Montacalvo Jeanette McCafferty George Martin Ralph Fernandez Paul Noethe Patricia Burwitz Michael Demone Eddie Dechert Salvatore Petruzzelli Phyllis Lindh Joseph K. Pfeil v. Pac. Rail Serv., Peter McKenna Greg Spina Jack Ricciardi John Oliver Andrew Hennessey Al Armetta Pincus Cohen Dave Quaid Adam Lukasweski William Harper Dorrance A. Lindh John Gugliotta George Whitehead John Shea Anthony Nazare Robert Tighe Dennis McCarthy Richard Montacalvo Jeanette McCafferty George Martin Ralph Fernandez Paul Noethe Patricia Burwitz Michael Demone Eddie Dechert Salvatore Petruzzelli Phyllis Lindh Joseph K. Pfeil, Nos. 93-5277 & 93-5386, 32 F.3d 820 (3rd Cir. 1994). “" N.J.S.A. 10:5-3. The day is long past when any employee need endure discrimination because of his or her race, religion, national origin, or gender.”

Peter Innes v. Madeline Marzano-Lesnevich, Esq. v. Mitchell A. Liebowitz, Esq., 87 A.3d 775 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014). “10:5-1 to -42, and the then recently-enacted amendment, N.J.S.A. 10:5-3, that specifically recognized "emotional stress" as cognizable damages under the statute.”

Wesley v. Palace Rehab. & Care Ctr., L.L.C., 3 F. Supp. 3d 221 (D.N.J. 2014). · cites it 2× “” N.J.S.A. § 10:5-3 (emphasis added); N.J.S.”

Mardini v. Viking Freight, Inc., 92 F. Supp. 2d 378 (D.N.J. 1999). · cites it 2× “The Catalan court found that: Based on the legislative intent demonstrated by N.J.S.A. § 10:5-3, we conclude that the plaintiffs common law claim that he was terminated because of his age in violation of public policy should not have been submitted to the jury.”

Show all 89 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.