## Facts

- Robert Smith worked for Millville Rescue Squad (MRS) for many years and became Director of Operations; his wife and several of her family members also worked for MRS.
- Smith began an extramarital affair with a volunteer under his supervision; the volunteer later left MRS, but the affair continued and contributed to marital conflict.
- In June 2005, Smith’s wife reported the affair to MRS’s CEO, John Redden; Smith also informed Redden.
- On January 1, 2006, Smith moved out of the marital home; he told Redden the next day that his marriage had collapsed and that he expected divorce.
- Smith testified Redden asked to be updated about developments in Smith’s marital status and later predicted an “ugly divorce,” stating he needed to take the matter to MRS’s board.
- The MRS board met and recorded reasons for termination including corporate restructuring and alleged poor performance; Smith was terminated the next day.
- Smith testified he had not been formally disciplined, had been promoted, and had received annual raises; he asserted the divorce was amicable.
- Smith claimed he was terminated because MRS acted on assumptions that his separation and impending divorce from a co-employee would be disruptive, rather than on actual performance problems.

## Issues

1. Whether “marital status” under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) covers employees who are separated, contemplating divorce, in divorce proceedings, or divorced.
2. Whether Smith presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie LAD claim for marital-status discrimination, making involuntary dismissal at the close of his case improper.

## Decision

- The court held the LAD’s bar on discrimination based on “marital status” extends beyond a married/unmarried binary and includes employees who are separated, divorcing, or divorced (and those declaring an intent to marry).
- The court concluded Smith presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to infer that MRS terminated him based on divorce-related assumptions rather than job performance.
- The court affirmed the Appellate Division, reversed the trial court’s involuntary dismissal, and remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- “Marital status” under the LAD is broadly construed to include single, married, separated, divorced, widowed, engaged, and related transitional states.
- Employment decisions violate the LAD when based on stereotypes or generalized predictions about how an employee’s marital circumstances (including an anticipated divorce) will affect the workplace, instead of evidence tied to performance or conduct.
- On a motion for involuntary dismissal after the plaintiff’s case, the evidence must be viewed most favorably to the plaintiff; if it permits a reasonable inference of discrimination, the case must proceed.
- Under the LAD’s burden-shifting framework, a plaintiff can satisfy a prima facie case by showing protected status, adequate performance evidence, adverse action, and circumstances supporting an inference of discrimination; conflicting explanations and timing may support an inference of pretext.

## Conclusion

The court ruled that the LAD protects employees who are separated and in the process of divorce and that Smith’s evidence—suggesting termination driven by anticipated divorce-related disruption—was sufficient to require a trial rather than dismissal at the close of his case.


Smith v. Millville Rescue Squad, 225 N.J. 373, 139 A.3d 1 (N.J. 2016)