James Kerrigan v. Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., et al.

In this diversity action for retaliatory discharge, both federal courts refused to apply New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act which gives a whistleblowing employee like petitioner far more employee-friendly remedies than Title VII provides. Does their substitution of Title VII jurisprudence for this bedrock public policy of New Jersey to deny petitioner relief comport with due process or deprive him of a remedy to which he was entitled under State law, subverting notions of federalism and comity for which Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 65 (1938) stands?