Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kibble v. Weeks Dredging & Construction Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided August 9, 1999Published

1DissentColeman, J.

The Court’s conclusion that a worker may not knowingly and intelligently waive future dependency claims, unless the worker’s spouse or other beneficiary consents, is contrary to legislative intent and is inconsistent with the long-standing practice by the bar and bench in the Division. Hence, I dissent.

I

Carl Kibble was employed by respondent Weeks Dredging & Construction Co. from September 1980 until March 1984 as a welder/torch cutter. He had worked for other employers in the same capacity from the mid-1950s until 1980. During the course of that employment, Kibble was exposed to chromium,…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Close v. Kordulak Bros.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
  2. Lepis v. LepisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
  3. Alan J. Cornblatt, PA v. BarowSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  4. Watkins v. Resorts International Hotel & Casino Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1991
  5. Bill J. Gambocz v. Anthony M. YelencsicsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API