New Jersey Statutes
N.J. Stat. § 34:15-29 (2026)
Compensation preferential lien; claim not assignable; set offs
✓ current as of May 2026
The right of compensation granted by this chapter shall have the same preference against the assets of the employer as is now or may hereafter be allowed by law for a claim for unpaid wages for labor. Claims or payments due under this chapter shall not be assignable, and shall be exempt from all claims of creditors and from levy, execution or attachment. The right of compensation granted by this chapter may be set off against disability pension benefits or payments but shall not be set off against employees' retirement pension benefits or payments.
Amended by L.1977, c. 156, s. 1, eff. July 14, 1977.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1940–1990 · leading case: Matthews v. Lewis, 617 S.W.2d 43 (Ky. 1981).
Matthews v. Lewis, 617 S.W.2d 43 (Ky. 1981). “The relevant'portion of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 34:15-29 provides: ‘Claims or payments due under this chapter shall not be assignable, and shall be exempt from all claims of creditors and from levy, execution or attachment.”
Buczynski v. Gen. Motors Corp., 464 F. Supp. 133 (D.N.J. 1978). “3 N.J.S.A. 34:15-29 The defendant also argues that the court erred in finding that the New Jersey law forbidding the offsets 4 (L.”
Buczynski v. Gen. Motors Corp., 456 F. Supp. 867 (D.N.J. 1978). “July 14, 1977, amending N.J.S.A. 34:15-29. 6 . Subsequent to the filing of the complaint, the defendant has been making the deductions in plaintiffs’ pension benefits and has made it clear that it will continue to do so.”
Cardenas v. Cardenas, 478 A.2d 968 (R.I. 1984). “2d at 478 , 479 (quoting N.J.S.A. 34:15-29). Similar results have been *971 reached in Meadows v.”
Deiches v. Carpenters'health & Welf. Fund of Phila., 572 F. Supp. 766 (D.N.J. 1983). “2d 402 (1981), the Supreme Court held that ERISA preempted a New Jersey statute (N.J.S.A. 34:15-29) that prohibited pension plans from setting off Workman’s Compensation payments against retirement payments.”
In re Raiken, 33 F. Supp. 88 (D.N.J. 1940). “II, 34:15-29, N.J.S.A. 34:15-29, provides: “The right of compensation granted by this chapter shall have the same preference against the assets of the employer as is now or may hereafter be allowed by law for a claim for unpaid wages for labor.”
Richardson v. Lahood & Assocs., Inc., 571 So. 2d 1082 (Ala. 1990). “N.J.Stat.Ann. § 34:15-29 (West 1988). The Supreme *1086 Court determined that Congress intended to permit “integration,” i.”
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.