A New Jersey court has upheld a ruling against Kismet Limousine and its president, Emin Kahyaoglu, for violating state wage laws. The decision affects the company’s labor practices and sets a precedent for how similar cases may be handled in the future.

The New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division ruled on November 9, 2026, affirming the Department of Labor and Workforce Development's findings that Kismet Limousine failed to comply with the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (WHL) and the New Jersey Wage Payment Law (WPL). The court's decision came after Kismet appealed a previous ruling from July 14, 2025, which assessed unpaid wages, penalties, and an administrative fee against the company.

This case began when the New Jersey Department of Labor conducted two audits of Kismet Limousine. The first audit revealed that the company had not contributed to the unemployment and temporary disability benefits fund for its employees, as required by the Unemployment Compensation Law. The second audit found that Kismet failed to maintain proper payroll records and improperly deducted wages from employees.

Kismet Limousine contended that its workers were independent contractors, not employees, and therefore argued it was not subject to the wage laws. However, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that Kismet had not proven its workers were independent contractors under the state’s ABC test, which is used to classify workers.

In a previous case, Kismet International v. New Jersey Department of Labor & Workforce Development (Kismet I), the court had already affirmed that Kismet’s workers were employees. The court noted that the determination of whether workers are employees or independent contractors is crucial for compliance with labor laws. The court stated, "Whether a putative employer is required to pay into an unemployment benefits fund...turns on whether its workers are employees or independent contractors."

After the New Jersey Supreme Court denied Kismet’s petition for certification in Kismet I, the ALJ resumed the second audit case. The Department of Labor moved for a summary decision based on the prior ruling, and the ALJ found that Kismet had not provided sufficient evidence to dispute the Department's findings.

The court ruled that Kismet’s attempt to relitigate the employment status of its workers was barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel, which prevents parties from re-litigating issues that have already been decided in a previous case. The court emphasized that Kismet had ample opportunity to contest the findings in the earlier proceedings.

In its ruling, the court stated, "Kismet failed to establish the final agency decision was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable." This affirmation means that Kismet must comply with the wage laws and pay the assessed penalties and fees.

The implications of this ruling extend beyond Kismet Limousine. It reinforces the importance of proper classification of workers and compliance with labor laws for businesses in New Jersey. Companies must ensure they are correctly identifying their workers as employees or independent contractors, as misclassification can lead to significant legal and financial consequences.

Moving forward, businesses in New Jersey should review their labor practices and ensure compliance with state wage laws to avoid similar disputes. This case serves as a reminder of the legal obligations employers have towards their employees and the potential repercussions of failing to meet those obligations.

As for Kismet Limousine, it may consider appealing the decision to the New Jersey Supreme Court, although the chances of success are uncertain given the court's previous denial of certification in Kismet I. There are no related cases currently pending that could affect this ruling.