Peter Verniero

“ If deception is proved, a jury could decide based on the totality of circumstances “that [defendant] evidenced an awareness of the ‘virtual’ certainty of injury [that could arise] from the [unabated violations] .” ”

“ Second, the worker must show that the circumstances surrounding the injury constituted “more than a fact of life of industrial employment” and that they were “plainly beyond anything the Legislature intended the Workers' Compensation Act to immunize.” Ibid.
When evaluating whether a claimant has satisfied those two conditions, we consider “the totality of the facts contained in the record [.] ” Id. at 623, 790 A.2d 884. We have emphasized that an employer's mere knowledge that the workplace is dangerous does not qualify as an intentional wrong. ”

“ To vault the exclusivity bar, an injured worker must satisfy two conditions first articulated in Millison v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 101 N.J. 161, 501 A.2d 505 (1985) . First, he or she must allege sufficient facts demonstrating that an employer knew that its actions were “substantially certain to result in injury or death to the employee [.] ”