STEPHEN E. KLAUSNER. ESQ., LLC 40 South Main Street Manville

;
•
STEPHEN E. KLAUSNER . ESQ ., LLC
40 South Main Street
Manville, New Jersey 08835
(908) 685-1552
Attorney for Plaintiff
SUSAN NIEVES,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
SOMERSET COUNTY
LAW DIVISION
Plaintiff,
v.
DOCKET NO.: SOM-L-925-12
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY
OF PERTH AMBOY, JANINE CAFFREY,
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, in
her Official and Individual
Capacities, ALVARO CORES
PRINCIPAL OF DR. HERBERT
RICHARDSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,
PERTH AMBOY in his Official and
Individual Capacities, KAREN
MOFFATT, VICE PRINCIPAL OF DR.
RICHARDSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,
PERTH AMBOY in her Official and
Individual Capacities, and
HECTOR MUNIZ, in his Individual
Capacity,
Civil Action
AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT, JURy
DEMAND AND DESIGNATION OF
TRIAL COUNSEL
Defendants .
Plaintiff, Susan Nieves, residing in the City of Perth Amboy,
Middlesex County, State of New Jersey 08861 by her attorney, Stephen
E. Klausner, by way of complaint against the Defendants alleges as
follows:
FIRST COUNT
1.
Plaintiff is a secretary employed by Defendant Perth Amboy
Board of Education with its primary facility located at 178 Barracks
Street, Perth Amboy, New Jersey 08862.
2.
Plaintiff is an employees as that term is defined in
N.J.S.A. 34:19(2) (b).
3.
Defendant, Perth Amboy Board of Education is an employer as
that term is defined in N.J.S.A. 34:19-2(b).
4.
Defendant, Alvaro Cores, whose principal office is located
at Dr. Herbert Richardson Elementary School, Perth Amboy, New Jersey
08861 was Plaintiff's supervisor and is an employer as that term is
used in N.J.S.A. 34:19(a) who was acting with authority granted by
Defendant, Perth Amboy Board of Education and its Superintendent,
Janine Caffrey.
5.
Defendant, Karen Moffatt, Vice Principal, whose principal
office was located at 178 Barracks Street, Perth Amboy, New Jersey
08861 was Defendant's chief school administrator, and is an employer
as that term is used in N.J.S.A. 34:19(a) who was acting with
authority granted by Defendant, Perth Amboy Board of Education.
6.
Hector Muniz was a secretary in the Dr. Herbert Richardson
School in Perth Amboy.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1.
Plaintiff Nieves is employed by Defendant, Perth Amboy Board
of Education as a tenured school secretary and has been employed by
the school district for eight years.
2.
Plaintiff complained orally and in writing to Defendants,
Cores and Moffatt.
3.
During Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, within the
last year, she disclosed to her supervisors that she had reasonable
basis to believe that administrators employed by Defendant, were
encouraging, aiding and abetting Defendant,
2
Muniz to run an illegal
alcohol sales and distribution business in the main office of a public
elementary school to parents, staff, Cores and Moffatt to purchase and
store the alcohol in the school, all during the school day with
student attending.
4.
Defendants by their conduct have violated Plaintiffs' rights
guaranteed to her in N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 et
her in violation
5.
b~
~.,
by retaliating against
Plaintiff's rights, N.J.S.A. 34:19-20.
On or about mid-November, 2011 Defendant, Muniz, who owned
and operated a New Jersey registered LLC named SexyHecty, posted signs
on the back of his computer in the main office and the faculty room of
the Dr. Herbert Richardson Elementary School advertising that he was a
~mixologistH
that was selling mixed drinks for the Thanksgiving,
Christmas, New Years holidays. His LLC used the school's address for
his registering the LLC.
6.
Since the faculty and many parents of children in the school
were of Puerto Rican ancestry or origin, he specifically advertised
that he was mixing an alcoholic beverage known as "coquito H, usually
made with rum and coconut milk.
7.
The sign advertising Muniz, mixing and selling of alcoholic
beverages was visible to anyone and everyone who entered the main
office of the Dr. Herbert Richardson School.
8.
On a number of occasions, Plaintiff personally observed,
Defendant, Caffrey, enter the main office of the Dr. Herbert
Richardson School to meet, Defendant, Cores and Moffatt.
9.
Plaintiff observed parents and staff purchasing bottles of
coquito and other mixed drinks were offered at Muniz's desk in the
3
main office during working hours when children were or could have been
in attendance.
10 .
Defendant, Muniz, was brazen enough to bring approximately
two or three dozen bottles of mixed drinks wrapped in aluminum foil on
each distribution day, storing same in the standard size refrigerator
that was in the copy room in main office.
11.
On delivery days, faculty and parents retrieved their
individual orders, usually paid Muniz cash and were given paid
receipts. These sales exchanges occurred in the main office during the
school day . .
12.
During this time period Defendants Cores and Moffatt both
publicly purchased and received bottles of coquito in Plaintiff's
office during the school day.
13.
Plaintiff and the school building's Home School Liaison both
orally complained to Cores by Plaintiff and Moffatt by the Home School
Liaison relative to the advertising sales and distribution in an
elementary school.
14.
Defendant, Muniz received mail addressed to SexyHecty LLC at
315 Stockton Street, the Dr. Herbert Richardson School's address, but
Defendant Cores did not care about this either when it was raised.
15.
The Dr . Herbert Richardson School has computer generated
security cameras in the hallway outside the main office.
16.
On information and belief, all activity in the corridor
outside of the main office is filmed everyday and stored on COs, if
not deleted or destroyed.
17.
Between mid-November, 2011, and December 23, 2011, upon
information and belief, Muniz stored, sold and delivered approximately
4
)T
seventy-five (75) bottles of his mixed alcohol drinks to Defendants,
Cores, Moffatt, school staff and parents in the Dr. Herbert
Richardson School building.
18.
Rather than discipline or prohibiting Muniz, storing,
selling and distributing alcoholic beverages in an elementary school.
Defendant Cores and Moffatt condoned same and retaliated against
Plaintiff.
19.
After Muniz preparing, selling and distributing alcohol
became public knowledge, Muniz allegedly complained to Defendants,
Cores and Moffatt and accused Plaintiff of harassing and intimidating
Plaintiff as a means of preventing Mrs. Nieves from discussing what
she observed in the Thanksgiving/Christmas/New Year time. At that
meeting Plaintiff again complained about Muniz's illegal sales of
alcohol and raised his sexually inappropriate emails to Plaintiff.
20.
Defendant Cores reacted by falsely issuing Plaintiff
reprimands that were absolutely false.
21.
Defendant Cores ordered Mrs. Nieves to a meeting and to
bring her A.F.T. representative.
22.
During the course of this meeting Nieves raised the fact
that Muniz had sent her on her school supplied computer sexually
oriented material during the work day.
23.
Plaintiff also requested information about the status of her
complaint about Muniz alcohol sales business in school.
24.
Defendant Cores ignored these issues and gave Plaintiff a
written reprimand despite the fact that Nieves stated that both were
active participants in this criminal activity.
5
25.
Plaintiff also stated that a rebuttal would be supplied.
26.
Cores then left the school building for a meeting with
Defendant Caffrey at the Administration Building.
27.
On or about the afternoon of April 3, 2012, Defendant
Moffatt called Plaintiff to her office and stated that Defendant Cores
had telephoned her from the Administration Building to retrieve his
reprimand letter.
28.
Plaintiff refused to do so and drafted a rebuttal on the
night of April 3, 2012.
29.
Plaintiff hand delivered her rebuttal to Defendants, Cores
and Moffatt. Cores refused to read same and retrieved Moffatt's copy
as well.
30 .
Defendant Cores then handed Plaintiff another complaint
against Plaintiff for allegedly having inappropriate conversations.
31.
Defendant Cores, in front of Plaintiff's A.F.T.
representative, took his new letter back stating it will only be
placed in Plaintiff's personnel file if Plaintiff does not return the
original reprimand and Plaintiff doesn't forget about Muniz sexual
emails and the alcohol being sold to staff and parents. Cores also
threatened to have fired the security guard who showed Plaintiff a
photograph from the security camera with Muniz kissing some women in
the elementary building.
32.
Plaintiff responded that Defendant Cores is blackmailing her
to protect Defendant, Muniz, Moffatt and himself.
33.
Plaintiff, with her A.F.T. representative present, returned
the original reprimand solely to save the security guard's position
34.
In the following weeks, Plaintiff continued to receive oral
6
and email reprimands from Defendants Cores and Moffatt.
35.
On or about April 26, 2012 Plaintiff was directed to meet
with the Board's Human Resources Director and to explain all of the
problems that she had at Dr . Herbert Richardson School .
36.
Plaintiff explained about all of the harassing, bullying,
blackmailing, selling of alcohol as well as the sexual emails that
Hector Muniz had been sending her at work. On May 1, she received an
interoffice envelope to her attention marked confidential. It was the
write up that Defendant Cores decided not to give her on April 27.
37.
Plaintiff then received a phone call from the Acting
Superintendent's secretary requesting that she meet with her. When
Plaintiff arrived at the Board Office she met with the Acting
Superintendent, Vivian Rodriguez, Bernice Marshall, Human Resources
Director as well as her A.F.T. Representative, Pam Campbell. Dr.
Rodriguez handed Plaintiff a letter of suspension effective
immediately and stated that the Perth Amboy Police Department would be
reaching out to her. Plaintiff asked why she was being suspended and
Rodriguez stated because she didn't report the alcohol claim sooner.
38.
Plaintiff was also transferred out of Dr. Herbert Richardson
School.
39.
As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants actions,
Plaintiff suffered from extremely high blood pressure and was taken to
the hospital.
WHEREFORE Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants as
follows:
A.
A finding that Defendants violated Plaintiff's rights by
retaliating against her in violation of the New Jersey Conscientious
7
~..
Employment Protection Act;
B.
Compensatory damages;
C.
Punitive damages;
D.
Attorney fees:
E.
Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
proper
SECOND COUNT
1.
Plaintiff repeats and real leges the allegations contained in
First Count of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
2.
At all times relevant herein Plaintiff was an employee as
that word is defined in N.J.S.A. 10:5-5(f).
3.
Defendant Perth Amboy Board of Education is an employer as
that word is used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-5(e).
4.
Defendant, Caffrey is an aider and abetter as that term is
used in N.J.S.A. 10 ;5 -12(e) and an inducer or conspirator as that term
is used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(c).
5.
Defendant, Cores is an aider and abetter as that term is
used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(e) and an inducer or conspirator as that term
is used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(c).
6.
Defendant, Moffatt is an aider and abetter as that term is
used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(e) and an inducer or conspirator as that term
is used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(c).
7.
Defendant, Muniz is an aider and abetter as that term is
used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(e) and an inducer or conspirator as that term
is used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(c).
8.
In mid-December, 2011, Plaintiff while using her school
provided computer at work, Defendant, Muniz forwarded to Plaintiff by
8
email a number of sexually suggestive and inappropriate emails.
9.
Defendants Cores and Moffatt ignored same and retaliated
against Plaintiff by threatening, retaliating and blackmailing
Plaintiff.
10.
Plaintiff alleges that she was suspended because of her
complaints of sexual harassment in violation of N.J.S.A. 10:S-12(a).
11.
As a direct and proximate result thereof, Plaintiff has been
damaged.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment as follows:
A.
Compensatory damages;
B.
Punitive damages;
C.
Damages including personal hardship, economic loss, physical
and emotional stress, other irreparable harm resulting from
the strain of this employment controversy; anxiety caused by
uncertainty, and resultant planning difficulty; career,
family and social disruption;
D.
C~sts
E.
Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
and attorneys' fees.
proper.
JURy DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
STEPHEN E. KLAUSNER, ESQ.
Attorney for PI intiff
9
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE IN FULL
THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE IN FULL
("Agreement") is made this day of July 2014, by and between Linda Nagy ("Third-Party
Plaintiff') and the Perth Amboy Board of Education ("Board"), and this settlement is on behalf
of the Board and Janine Caffrey, Alvaro Cores and Karen Moffat(collectively referred to as the
"Board Defendants") (Third-Party Plaintiff and the Board Defendants are sometimes hereinafter
collectively referred to as the "Parties" and each may be referred to severally as a "Party").
WHEREAS, Third-Party Plaintiff brought a counterclaim and Third-Party Complaint
entitled Linda. Nagy v. Board of Education of the City of Perth Amboy. et al., a civil action filed
in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division- Somerset County, bearing the Docket
Number SOM-L-925-12 (collectively referred to herein as the "Action"); and
WHEREAS, the Board Defendants have denied the allegations made in the Action; and
WHEREAS, the Parties intend to adopt, by way of compromise and accord, without
adjudication of any issues of fact or law and without any admission of liability, all claims which
were either raised or which could have been raised in the Action, which claims are more fully
described below; and .
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual agreements
contained herein, and intending to be legally bound, the Parties mutually agree as follows:
L
RECITALS
The above recitals are hereby referred to and incorporated by reference.
2.
SCOPE OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which the Parties mutually
agree to resolve the following claims:
(a) all claims in the Action (including but not limited to all claims, counterclaims, crossclaims and third-party claims, including any claim against any current or former
employee, agent, member or representative of the Board and specifically including
claims for attorneys' fees and costs) which were raised or could have been raised,
whether in the Action, by post-judgment motion in the Action or by subsequent
action.
It is the Parties' mutual intention to , settle (through this Agreement) all claims as specified in
subpart (a) immediately above. As a result, all claims specified in subpart (a) immediately above
are hereinafter referred to and defined as the "Settled Claims." The Parties specifically agree
that there are no claims which have been raised or could have been raised by them to date against
each other in the Action other than the Settled Claims.
The Parties do recognize there may be other cla s which this. Agreement does not
resolve, which are:
(b)
claims, if any, arising from the breach of this Agreement;
As a result, the claim specified in subpart (b) is specifically excluded from the Settled Claims.
In full compromise of the Settled Claims and in consideration for the Release as snore
fully set forth at paragraph 5 below, the. Board will make payment to Third-Party Plaintiff as set ,
forth in paragraph 3 below. Third-Party Plaintiff also agrees to enter into a Stipulation of
Dis ssal with Prejudice as part of this settlement. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to
interfere with any accrued or vested benefits or rights concerning unrelated aspects of ThirdParty Plabatiff s employment with the Board, such as accrued benefits or vested pensto benefits.
3.
PAYMENT
The Board, on behalf of the Board Defendants, shall pay Third-Party Plaintiff the total
sum of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000.00)("Paytnent") and remove the following
memorandums/disciplinary letters from . Third-Party Plaintiff's personnel file: (A) June 12, 2012
letter from Alvaro Cores to Third-Party Plaintiff regarding "Inappropriate
2
comments/professional conduct" which addresses an incident that occurred on June 6, 2012; and
(B) a February 2013 memorandum/disciplinary letter from Karen Moffatt to Third Party Plaintiff
regarding an allegation of staff intimidation. The payment and removal of these two
memorandums/disciplinary letters shall constitute full consideration for the execution of this
Agreement and any other documents necessary to resolve and compromise the Settled Claims,
with finality and with prejudice. This payment is given in full payment and satisfaction for nil
alegdmsincu,btolmedacisgnthe.BoardDfs
compensatory damages, bodily injury, personal injury, emotional distress damages, punitive
damages, attorneys' fees, and costs allegedly incurred by Third-Party Plaintiff. However, neither
this Agreement or Provision shall act to preclude the use of the two above-referenced
memorandums/disciplinary letters by any party in the ongoing litigation of the matter captioned
Susan Nieves v. Board of Education of the City of Perth Amboy, et al., Docket No.: SOM-L925-12.
The settlement proceeds will be payable, in full, by the. Board to Third- Party Plaintiff as
follows: a check issued to "Advani Law, LIE" in the amount of $15,000 and an additional check
issued to "Linda Nagy" in the amount of $30,000. Third-Party Plaintiff will be responsible for
paying taxes, if any, due on this sum. Third-Party Plaintiff asserts that the sum paid to her
pursuant to this Agreement represents: (1) the refund of fees and costs paid to her attorney for
hourly time spent on the file; and (2) compensation for pain and suffering that Third-Party
Plaintiff alleges to have endured. The Board Defendants make no representations as to the tax
consequences of the payment referred to herein and shall assume no responsibility for any tax
liability attributed to Third-Party Plaintiff. Third-Party Plaintiff agrees to pay any and all taxes
found to be owed from the payment made pursuant to this Agreement. The aforementioned
3
checks will be issued and the two above-referenced memorandum/disciplinary letters removed
by the Board within thirty (30) days from the execution of this Agreement by both parties. ThirdParty Plaintiff agrees to indemnify and hold the Board Defendants harmless from any claims,
assessments, demands, penalties and interest owed, or found to be owed, as a result of any
payment made to this Agreement.
Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, it is further understood that as a
condition of this settlement, alI claims and/or liens, past, current or future arising out of this
settlement or asserted against the proceeds of this settlement are to be satisfied by Third-Party
Plaintiff, including but not limited to any Medicare or Medicaid claims and/or liens, workers'
compensation claims and/or liens, Social Security claims and/or liens, hospital/health care
insurer claims and/or liens, physician or attorney claims and/or liens, or any of the statutory,
equitable, common law or judgment claims and/or liens, including but not limited to any claim
and/or Lien based on subrogation or any legal or equitable theory. Third-Party Plaintiff therefore
agrees, upon prompt presentation of any such claims and/or liens, to defend the Board
Defendants and Releasees (as defined herein) against any such claims and/or liens and to
indemnify and hold the Board Defendants and Releasees harmless against any judgment entered
against Third-Party Plaintiff based on such claims and/or liens, including the payment of any
fines, charges and attorney's fees and costs incurred as a result of any such lien. Failure to
satisfy any such lien shall be considered a breach of this Agreement and Third-Party Plaintiff
agrees to pay all costs, interest and attorney's fees relative to any such lien.
4.
NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY
This Agreement is a result of a compromise and accord to buy the Parties' peace. It is
expressly understood and agreed that nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to be, nor
shall be construed as, nor shall be represented by any party, their attorneys or their agents to be,
as an admission or determination of liability by the Board Defendants, or their aaents, employees
or members, as to the validity of any claims asserted or assertable in the Settled Claims, as the
Board Defendants continue to deny any liability and disclaim any responsibility for such claims.
It is agreed that this Agreement shall not be used by any Party as evidence or in any other matter
or for any other purpose in any court proceeding or any other proceeding except for an action
arising under paragraph 2(b) of this Agreement, or in an action concerning any Party's tax. status.
5.
RELEASE AND EXTINCTION OF CLAIMS
Third-Party Plaintiff agrees to and hereby releases and gives up any and all claims and
rights which Third-Party Plaintiff may have against the Board Defendants, including the Board's
current and former officers and employees, members, agents, attorneys, successors, assigns,
trustees, receivers, and heirs (all of the foregoing are collectively identified as "Releasees").
This releases all claims, including those of which Third-Party Plaintiff is not aware and those not
mentioned in this Release/Agreement. This Release/Agreement applies to claims resulting from
anything which has happened up until now. Third-Party Plaintiff specifically releases the
following claims: any and all claims, direct and indirect, and rights for any injury and/or
damages which Third-Party Plaintiff may have against the Releasees, specifically including but
not limited to,. all claims asserted in the Action. Third-Party Plaintiff hereby releases all claims
against the'Releasees that were asserted or could have been asserted in the Action, including all
claims revealed or which , may have been revealed through discovery, including, but not limited
to depositions, answers to interrogatories, medical reports, and throughout settlement
negotiations, any related torts (specifically including but not limited to claims for civil battery,
civil assault, outrage, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress), claims of
5
discrimination, civil rights violations, aiding and abetting and retaliation, and emotional injuries
accompanied by physical manifestations, and also releases any claims which she may have for
attorneys' fees, expenses of litigation and/or costs of suit, whether based upon statute, regulation,
court rule or common law. Third-Party Plaintiff further releases claims under the Constitution of
the United States of America, 42 U.S.C. §1983, 42 U.S.C. §1985, the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(hereinafter referred to as "Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. §2000e, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and 1991,
the Americans with Disabilities Act (hereinafter referred to as "ADA"), 42 U.S.C. §12101, the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §621, the Older Workers Benefits Protection
Act, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (hereinafter referred to
as "USERRA"), 38 U.S.C. §4312, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (hereinafter
referred to as "LAD") N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq.,
the New Jersey Conscientious Employee
Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as "CEPA"), N.J.S.A. 34:19-1, et seq. , the Constitution of
the State of New Jersey, the New Jersey Civil Rights Act, N.J.S.A. 10:6-1, at seq., the New
Jersey Public Employer-Employee Relations Act, the New Jersey Civil Service Act, N.J.S.A.
11A1-1 et seq., the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, the New Jersey Public
Employees' Occupational Safety and Health Act, N.J.S.A. 18A:1-1 et seq., all common law,
regulatory and statutory law claims, retaliation of any kind, breach of promise, breach of
contract, violation of . any collective bargaining agreement, misrepresentation, negligence, fraud,
estoppel, violation of public policy, any tort, contractual, quasi-contractual, respondeat superior
claim, tortious interference, spoliation of evidence and negligence. Third-Party Plaintiff
acknowledges that she is not the: prevailing party in the Action.
Third-Party Plaintiff understands, agrees to and acknowledges that she is bound by this
Release/Agreement. Anyone who succeeds to her rights and responsibilities, such as Plaintiff's
6
heirs or the executors of Third-Party Plaintiff's estate, are also bound. This Release/Agreement
is made for the benefit of the Board Defendants and the Releasees and all who succeed to their
rights and responsibilities. In consideration for this Release, Third-Party Plaintiff has received
promises from the Board, as set forth more fully in paragaph 3.
6.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This Agreement, and all of its terms, are and will remain confidential to the maximum
extent permitted by law.
7.
NON-DISPARAGEMENT
Third-Party Plaintiff agrees not to disparage the Board Defendants or any of the Board's
employees or former employees. Third-Party Plaintiff shall neither solicit nor make any
comments, statements or the like to others regarding the Board Defendants or any Board
employee that could adversely affect the reputation, image, goodwill, commercial or public
interest of that party or which may be considered derogatory or disparaging.
The Board agrees not to disparage the Third-Party Plaintiff. The Board shall neither
solicit nor make any comments, statements or the like to others regarding the Third-Party
Plaintiff that could adversely affect her reputation or image or which may be considered
derogatory or disparaging This Provision shall not apply to any statements made by the Board or
its employees related to the Third-Party Plaintiff's performance of her job functions or duties, as
she is currently still an employee of the Board. Additionally, this Provision shall also not apply
to any statements made by the Board or its employees related to the ongoing litigation of the
matter captioned Susan Nieves v. Board of Education of the City of Perth Amboy, et al., Docket
No.: SOM-L-925-12.
In the event of a claimed breach of this Agreement, either party may seek relief,
including damages, restitution and injunctive relief, at law or in equity.
8.
NO RIGHTS CONFERRED UPON NON-PARTIES
This Agreement is intended to confer rights and benefits only upon the Parties and is not
intended to confer any right or benefit upon any other person or entity. No person or entity other
than the Parties shalt have any legally enforceable rights under this Agreement. All rights of
action for any breach of this Agreement are hereby reserved to the Parties.
9. COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
The Parties expressly agree that their performance under this Agreement is to be
governed by a covenant of good faith and fair dealing. No Party will take any action which
would deprive another of the full benefit of the Agreement.
10. FULL UNDERSTANDING
This Agreement sets forth the complete understanding, and entire agreement between the
Parties andsupersedes any and all prior agreements or understandings between the Parties. This
Agreement may not be modified, altered, changed, discharged, terminated or waived except upon
express written consent of the parties wherein specific reference is made to this Agreement. It is
agreed that there are no other understandings or agreements (either written or oral) which would
have any impact upon the present Action. By executing this Agreement, Third-Party Plaintiff
represents and acknowledges that she does not rely, and has not relied upon, any representation
or statement not set forth in this Agreement made by the Board Defendants or their counsel with
regard to the subject matter, basis, or effect of this Agreement or otherwise.
11. MATERIALITY
The Parties agree that each paragraph of this Agreement is material. In the event that any
portion of this Agreement is determined to be illegal, the Parties agree, in advance, to reform the
Agreement in good faith to provide each Party with the full benefit of the settlement
memorialized by this Agreement to the extent permitted by law.
12. REVOCATIONTERIOD
Third-Party Plaintiff acknowledges that she was given the opportunity to fully consider
this Agreement for a period of up to twenty-one (21) days to review this Agreement and seven
(7) days from the execution of this Agreement to revoke this Agreement by delivering written
notification to Perry L. Lattiboudere, Esq., Adams Gutierrez & Lattiboudere, 1037 Raymond
Boulevard, Suite 900, Newark, New Jersey 07102. It is understood that if this Agreement is
revoked, it will not be effective or enforceable and Third-Party Plaintiff will not be entitled to the
entire consideration described herein. Third-Party Plaintiff has knowingly and voluntarily
agreed to enter into this Agreement and waive the twenty-one (21) day consideration period.
13. MEDICAID AND SCHIP EXTENSION ACT OF 2007
As a condition of full and final settlement of this matter, Third-Party Plaintiff agrees to
complete, execute and return to the Board's counsel the form attached relating to the Medicare,
Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007, which is hereby expressly incorporated as part of
the Agreement.
14. SERVICES OF COUNSEL
The Parties certify that they have had the opportunity to discuss this Agreement with
counsel. They are fully satisfied with the services of their counsel with respect to both this
Agreement and all other aspects of the Action and they enter into this Agreement knowingly,
9
willingly and without any coercion or improper inducements.
15. AUTHORITY OF SIGNATORIES
Each signatory represents that she or he is a Party or has been duly authorized by a Party
to sign on that Party's behalf and that in the case of the Board Defendants all procedural
formalities attendant to the execution of this Agreement have been satisfied. The signatory for
the Board Defendants further covenants that he or she is duly empowered to sign this Agreement
and that there is no legal reason (i.e., receivership or bankruptcy) which prevents or will prevent
the Board Defendants-from completely performing their obligations under this agreement.
16. LAW GOVERNING
This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New Jersey.
17. SEVERABILI I Y
Should any provision of this Agreement be declared or determined by any court to be
illegal or invalid, the validity of the remaining parts, terms or provisions shall not be affected
thereby and said illegal or invalid part, term or provision shall be deemed not be part of this
Agreement.
10
18, EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS
The Parties agree that this agreement may be signed in counterparts and that facsimiles of
signatures will have the same force and effect as original signatures.
THIRD PARTY PE6<INTIFF
-
neia /268
1DX AGY
Date: 7/
6/ fiy
Date:
DEFENDANT
WITNESS
PERTH AMBOY BOARD OF EDIXATION
0/B/0 BOARD DEFENDANTS
By:
Date:
Date:
11