relationship induced by an employee’s fraud. A party that has been fraudulently induced to enter into a contract may rescind the contract to restore the status quo. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 164 (1981). Applying that axiom, an employer that has been fraudulently induced to hire an employee may rescind the employment agreement. Here, the only agreement that existed was the one contained in the employment manual concerning termination procedures. Hence, the employer is entitled to rescind the implied contract to adhere to the termination procedures contained in the employment manual, and cannot be held liable under a theory of breach of implied contract for failure to adhere to such procedures. Cf. Massey v. Trump’s Castle Hotel & Casino, 828 F.Supp. 314, 325 (D.N.J.1993) (<HOLDING>); Bazzi v. Western & Southern Life Ins. Co.,
holding that an employment relationship allegedly terminated with fraud and malice may open employer to tort liability beyond the bounds of ordinary liability for breach of contract holding that afteracquired evidence may completely bar a claim for breach of the employment contract because the employers duty arises from the contract itself and falls with that contract holding that employer may use afteracquired evidence of resume fraud to avoid liability for breach of an employment contract if it can show that it had the power to void the contract due to reliance on material misrepresentations even where the employer was unaware of that power when the breach occurred holding that where there was a breach of contract accompanied by aggravating factors that it was proper to treble the breach of contract damages recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract