In New Jersey it is very difficult to get past the exclusive remedy provision. The leading case on proving an intentional harm claim sufficient to get beyond the exclusive remedy is Millison v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., 101 N.J. 161 (1985) in which plaintiffs had shown intentional wrong by respondent in deliberately concealing x-ray evidence of asbestos injuries. In Millison the court set forth two factors in proving deliberate intent to injure:
- Conduct which amounts to substantial certainty of harm, well beyond negligence or recklessness; and
- A context in which the injury or illness is plainly beyond anything the Legislature could have contemplated as entitling the employee to recover only under the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act, excluding those risks that are simply a fact of life in the industrial setting.
