Nardi v. Stevens Institute of Technology, Civil Action No. 96-CV-4508(DGT).

Decision Date17 August 1999
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 96-CV-4508(DGT).
Citation60 F.Supp.2d 31
PartiesVittorio NARDI, Plaintiff, v. STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

William Mullin, Graham, Miller, Neandross, Mullin & Roonan, P.C., New York City, Raymond C. Fay, Andrew N. Cook, Bell, Boyd & Lloyd, Washington, DC, for plaintiff.

Maurice J. Nelligan, Apruzzese, McDermott, Mastro & Murphy, P.C., Liberty Corner, NJ, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TRAGER, District Judge.

Plaintiff Dr. Vittorio Nardi, a plasma physicist and New York domiciliary, had for nearly thirty years conducted government funded research at defendant Stevens Institute of Technology ("Stevens") in Hoboken, New Jersey. His relationship with Stevens ended in January 1995 after he received notice from Stevens that his plasma research laboratory had to be relocated to make room for a planned laser optics laboratory complex. Nardi alleges the following six causes of action arising out of the severance of his relationship with Stevens: (1) breach of an employment contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) promissory estoppel; (4) fraudulent misrepresentation; (5) violation of the Age Discrimination In Employment Act ("ADEA"); and (6) violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (age). Defendant has moved for summary judgment on all six causes of action.

Background

(1)

Stevens is a private educational institution providing graduate and undergraduate degrees in engineering and the applied and natural sciences. Nardi came to Stevens in 1967 on an exchange program. He was hired as a Visiting Research Associate Professor of Physics on a one year appointment. See Nardi Dep., at 6. He remained at Stevens until 1995, serving in the Physics Department as a Visiting Research Professor and later as a Research Professor. From 1980 until his working relationship with Stevens ended, Nardi also headed the Plasma Physics Research Laboratory in the Physics Department. Nardi's work was funded almost entirely by government grants. See Nardi Dep., at 49-50.1

In the early years of his relationship with Stevens, Nardi served on a year to year basis. See Nardi Dep., at 31. When he became a resident of the United States in the mid 1970's,2 Nardi was told by Robert Ehrlich, Dean of Research, that his appointment was without limitation as long as he had grants to support his research. See Nardi Dep., at 33. Later, Provost Pollara told Nardi that he "was staying at Stevens as long as ... we had research contracts." See Nardi Dep., at 43-44. The agreement was also confirmed in conversations with Provost Griskey as recently as 1988, see Nardi Aff., ¶¶ 2-4, and acknowledged and understood by Dr. Kenneth Rogers, Stevens' President from 1972 to 1987. See Pl. Exh.2, at 35-36. Moreover, in connection with Nardi's 1978 application for alien employment certification, Dr. Ehrlich stated, on a Department of Labor Job Offer form, that Nardi's "Job offer [was] permanent, contingent upon continued research funding." Def. Exh.2. Defendant does not dispute that such statements were made, only whether these statements, alone, were sufficient to create a binding employment contract that could only be terminated if Nardi failed to obtain outside financing.

(2)

In or about 1988, all academic departments, including the Physics Department, were requested by Stevens' then recently appointed President, Harold J. Raveché, to conduct a self-critical analysis and to formulate a strategic plan for each department's future. It was the President's stated objective that Stevens should focus its limited resources on achieving excellence in a relatively few strategic areas, called "steeples of excellence," which would benefit the worlds of industry and commerce. Def. Exh.3 (Physics Department Plan1988-1993). The "steeples of excellence" would, in turn, benefit Stevens by enhancing its reputation in the commercial and academic communities. The Physics Department's 1988 draft to the President made three observations that are relevant here:

At the present time, the largest concentration of Department manpower and student interest is in the area of optics/solid state physics and engineering. This is also the area of greatest growth at the present and in the near future .... This should provide sufficient resources to establish a major `steeple of excellence' at Stevens.

* * * * * *

The third area of support for experimental work in the Department is in Plasma Physics and Nuclear Fusion. At present no regular member of the faculty works in this area which is headed by Research Professor Nardi.... Within the next year the Department should decide whether this effort is to be a major focus of effort or whether it should simply continue until external funding is no longer available.

* * * * * *

Space is a major problem in the Department. All available space for research is already heavily utilized and the need for additional space will increase. Additional space must be [found] in the Burchard Building [the site of the Plasma Physics Laboratory].

Id. at 5, 6, and 15.

Five years later, in December 1993, the Physics Department submitted an updated Strategic Plan in which it was reported that the Department was redirecting its research efforts into two specialties: laser physics and quantum electron physics. See Def. Exh.4 (Physics Department Strategic Plan — 1993), at 1. The Plan cited the potential for growth in the area of laser physics:

Optics and laser technology form the basis of a developing industry, characterized by rapidly moving frontiers both in the areas of laser development and applications. This expansion in laser applications has contributed to the great industrial demand for scientists and engineers with backgrounds in optical and laser physics and technology.

Id. at 10-11. Plasma physics was not identified by the Plan as a research priority of the Department. Plasma physics was, however, mentioned as one of several groups whose research efforts the Department would continue to encourage. See id. at 15. A revised draft of the Department's Plan stated:

While the research area of plasma physics does not fall directly into the [laser physics and quantum electron physics] programs, it is nonetheless a legitimate field of research and deserves the encouragement of the Department.

Def. Exh.5 (Physics Department Strategic Plan — Revised Draft), at 17.

The President critiqued the Department's Plan in May 1994, citing various shortcomings and raising several questions about issues the Department had ignored, such as: "How do the groups in Dynamical Systems and Plasma Physics benefit undergraduates?" Def. Exh.6 (Memo From Pres. Raveché to Prof. Koller, dated 5/13/94), at 2. President Raveché also had a number of suggestions, including a proposal that "the Plasma Physics Laboratory relocate away from Stevens and that the laboratories in Pierce [a laboratory building] be brought to Burchard [site of the Plasma Physics Laboratory] for better synergy with faculty and graduate students." Id.

By September 1994, President Raveché had formulated a "Strategic Plan — Working Draft" for Stevens. In that draft, he announced that

[t]his draft is being distributed to promote extensive input on efficacious strategies for carving a distinctive niche among the nation's technological universities, a niche that enables Stevens to rise in its national standing.

* * * * * *

The most distinctive feature of the "steeples," and that which will continue to drive Stevens' national ascent, is that they are focused on solving technological problems of importance to industry and government.

* * * * * * These plans call for a reshaping of the science programs along directions that align with Stevens' long-standing tradition for practical problem solving.... Funds would be sought for a state-of-the-art laser and optics undergraduate laboratory [which] would be developed.

Def. Exh.7 (Strategic Plan — Working Draft), at 2, 12, 19-20. Contemporaneous with the distribution of this Strategic Plan was a notice from the head of the Physics Department to Nardi that he would have to relocate his laboratory:

In consonance with the Institute's drive for national excellence, it is necessary to focus our efforts and concentrate on a few areas in which we can marshal these resources and achieve our goals. In this regard, the Department has been instructed to proceed with the planning and implementation of a world class research and teaching laboratory complex in optics centered around the development of lasers and their application to the solution of a wide range of physical problems.

The only space available for this new laboratory is the area on the south [sic] end of the fifth floor of Burchard in which your research activities are currently housed.... For these reasons, and on behalf of the Institute, I am obliged to tell you that the relationship that has existed between you and Stevens with regard to your research efforts will have to terminate by the anniversary date of your current research grant, in [sic] January 31, 1995.

Def. Exh.8 (Letter From Prof. Koller to Nardi, dated 9/13/94) (emphasis added).

"Current research grant" was a reference to a contract between Stevens and the United States Air Force which had resulted from a research proposal dated May 14, 1993, prepared by Nardi and approved by the Head of the Physics Department and by the Dean of Research. See Def. Exh.9 (Research proposal, dated 5/14/93). The grant had envisioned a three year effort, beginning in January 1994. The Air Force had accepted the proposal and approved a grant of money for the first year of the proposal (February 1, 1994 to January 31, 1995) with the stipulation that, if the parties so agreed prior to the anniversary date, "the Government may support twelve additional months of research effort in the form of a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Am. Lecithin Co. v. Rebmann
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • September 30, 2017
    ...not met, courts applying New Jersey law have refused to enforce the purported oral contracts. See, e.g., Nardi v. Stevens Inst. of Tech., 60 F. Supp. 2d 31, 41-43 (E.D.N.Y. 1999) (terms of oral promise too vague to enforce, and no demonstration of forbearance); Scudder v. Media Gen., Inc., ......
  • Nardi v. Stevens Institute of Technology, CIV. A.96CV4508DGT.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • October 13, 1999
    ...the August Memorandum and Order which allowed an implied employment contract theory to proceed to trial. See Nardi v. Stevens Inst. of Tech., 60 F.Supp.2d 31, 45 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). Stevens maintains that the implied contract theory "imposed by the (1) was not argued by plaintiff in his motion......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT