New Jersey Employment Lawyer Blog
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision reinforcing that undocumented workers are entitled to recover unpaid wages for work they already performed. The ruling in Lopez v. Marmic LLC, decided on March 19, 2026, makes clear that an employer cannot avoid paying minimum wage and overtime pay simply because the worker lacks immigration
authorization. For employees across New Jersey who have been denied proper compensation, the decision is a significant affirmation that many state wage and hour protections apply regardless of their immigration status.
The Facts
Sergio Lopez was hired in June 2015 as the superintendent of two buildings in Newark owned by Marmic LLC, a realty management company. When Mr. Lopez applied for the position, he provided an invalid Social Security number on a W-4 form. Marmic’s owner, Mike Ruane, initially paid Mr. Lopez $400 per week and provided him a basement apartment for which Mr. Lopez agreed to pay $800 per month.
After two weeks, Mr. Ruane discovered the Social Security number Mr. Lopez provided was invalid. Rather than continue to pay his wages, Mr. Ruane told Mr. Lopez that he could not pay him because doing so would be “against the law.” Instead, Mr. Ruane offered to let Mr. Lopez live in the apartment rent-free in exchange for continuing to perform his duties as the superintendent.
Mr. Lopez continued working under that arrangement for approximately three-and-a-half-years. He cleaned common areas, removed snow and leaves, painted apartments when they were vacant, fixed leaks and broken pipes, responded to tenant maintenance requests, and performed other building upkeep tasks. At the trial, Mr. Ruane confirmed that Mr. Lopez had performed all of those tasks.
Marmic kept no records of the hours Mr. Lopez worked, or the wages it owed him. In December 2018, Marmic fired Mr. Lopez, who filed a lawsuit alleging violations of New Jersey’s wage and hour laws.
Months after the trial, the trial court dismissed the case. It found Mr. Lopez was not credible because he had provided an invalid Social Security number and faulted him for not presenting specific proof about the total number of hours he had worked. The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that because Mr. Lopez was an undocumented worker, there could be no employee-employer relationship between the parties.
The Law
Two sets of New Jersey statutes were central to the case. First, the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (WHL) requires employers to pay employees who are not exempt from it at least minimum wage for all of the hours they work, plus an overtime premium for any hours they work beyond 40 hour in a week. Second, the New Jersey Wage Payment Law (WPL) requires employers to pay the full amount of the wages due on regular paydays. Both statutes define “employee” broadly to include anyone “suffered or permitted to work” by an employer. Neither statute excludes undocumented workers.
In addition, a federal law, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, makes it unlawful for an employer to hire or continue to employ an individual who is not authorized to work in the United States. However, the statute does not expressly prohibit paying wages to undocumented workers for work they already have performed.
Marmic argued that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB barred Mr. Lopez’s claims. In that case, the Court reversed an award of backpay to an undocumented worker who had been unlawfully terminated for union organizing. But, as the New Jersey Supreme Court explained, backpay compensates a worker for wages they would have earned if they not been fired. It is fundamentally different from compensation for work a person already has completed.
The Court’s Ruling
The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division, and ruled in Mr. Lopez’s favor on every issue.
First, the Court held that federal and state law do not conflict. Specifically, requiring an employer to pay wages for work already performed by an employee does not condone or continue a violation of federal immigration law. To the contrary, the Court reasoned that exempting employers from wage obligations to undocumented workers would give them an incentive to hire undocumented workers and pay them nothing, which would undermine the very purpose of federal immigration law.
Second, the Court rejected Marmic’s argument that its barter arrangement with Mr. Lopez created a relationship outside the scope of New Jersey’s wage and hour statutes. The Court found no broad exception in the WHL or the WPL for barter arrangements. While the WHL permits the fair value of lodging to count toward wages in certain circumstances, that provision is a way to satisfy wage obligations, but not a way to avoid them entirely.
Third, the Court addressed the burden of proof regarding hours worked. Both the trial court and the Appellate Division had faulted Mr. Lopez for not presenting specific records of his hours worked. However, under New Jersey law, it is the employer’s obligation to maintain records of hours worked and wages paid. When an employer fails to keep those records, a rebuttable presumption applies that the employee worked the hours and earned the wages he alleges in his claim. The trial court and the Appellate Division failed to apply that presumption.
Finally, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed the trial court’s use of the fact that Mr. Lopez provided Marmic an invalid Social Security number to find he was not credible. The Supreme Court held that evidence that a worker had an invalid Social Security number can serve as a proxy for their immigration status, which in turn could unduly prejudice the worker in a wage and hour case. It made it clear that, going forward, courts must evaluate such evidence carefully before a trial. If there is no legitimate purpose of that evidence other than to establish a person’s immigration status, then it should be excluded.
The Court remanded the case to a different trial judge to determine Mr. Lopez’s damages.
Why Does this Case Matter?
This decision matters for workers across New Jersey for several reasons.
It confirms that employees who perform work are entitled to be paid for it under New Jersey state law, regardless of their immigration status. Employers cannot use a worker’s lack of documentation as a reason to withhold wages after the work has been done.
It also puts employers on notice that barter arrangements do not override wage and hour requirements. An employer cannot substitute free housing, or any other non-cash arrangement, for the minimum wage and overtime pay guaranteed by the law, except in narrow circumstances that still require compliance with hourly wage obligations.
Further, that case it reinforces that the burden of keeping accurate time records falls on the employer, rather than the employee. When an employer fails to maintain accurate time records, the law does not penalize the worker by denying recovery. Instead, it creates a presumption in favor of the employee.
In addition, the ruling provides important guidance on the use of Social Security numbers as evidence in wage payment cases, limiting employers’ ability of employers to use immigration-related evidence to prejudice a judge or jury, and defeat otherwise valid claims for unpaid wages.
For workers who have been denied proper wages under any compensation arrangement, including situations involving barter, cash payments, or no payment at all, the Lopez decision is a reminder that New Jersey’s wage protections are broad and employers cannot contract around them.
Contact a Bergen County Employment Lawyer
If you believe your employer has failed to pay you the wages you are owed, the attorneys at Rabner Baumgart Ben-Asher & Nirenberg, P.C. can review the facts of your situation, explain your legal options, and help you determine what steps to take next. The firm represents employees throughout New Jersey. Contact Rabner Baumgart Ben-Asher & Nirenberg, P.C. at (201) 777-2250 to schedule a consultation.