A professional may obtain interviews but repeatedly lose opportunities after references or credentialing checks. That pattern calls for investigation; it does not by itself establish that a former employer made an unlawful statement.
Document the actual communication
Keep applications, recruiter messages, interview dates, rejection notices and any account of a reference. Identify who made the statement, who received it, the words used and how you learned of it. Separate direct evidence from an inference based on the timing of a rejection.
Consider claims and defenses separately
A damaging communication may raise issues beyond CEPA. Defamation and interference claims have their own requirements and defenses, including issues concerning truth, privilege and causation. A negative reference is not automatically actionable.
Continue documenting your employment efforts
Keep a job-search log and discuss reasonable efforts to obtain comparable work with counsel. New Jersey’s mitigation principles address reasonable efforts to reduce employment losses. Goodman v. London Metals Exchange, Inc., 86 N.J. 19 (1981). Alleged interference does not automatically excuse every effort to reduce wage losses. Tell counsel about medical restrictions, credentialing obstacles and specific lost opportunities so those issues can be evaluated on evidence.
Request a consultation to discuss the employment and reputational issues together.
This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.


