Erickson v. Marsh & McLennan Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
117 N.J. 539 (1990)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
John Erickson worked for insurance agency Marsh & McLennan (M & M). According to Erickson, M & M fabricated allegations of sexual discrimination against him and terminated him from M & M. While seeking employment with other insurance agencies, the prospective employers asked M & M why Erickson had been terminated. M & M responded that Erickson did not have the level of expertise required for their clients, but that he had general knowledge of commercial insurance and was well known among the insurance markets. Erickson (plaintiff) sued M & M (defendant), claiming that M & M’s responses to potential employers were libelous. The trial court ruled that M & M’s responses to Erickson’s potential employers were subject to a qualified privilege, and instructed the jury that in order to overcome that privilege, Erickson needed to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that M & M acted with actual malice. The trial jury found in favor of Erickson. The Appellate Division reversed, and entered judgment in favor of M & M. Erickson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Garibaldi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
