Bigstock
On July 29, 2019, the N.J. Supreme Court decided US Masters Residential Property (USA) Fund v. New Jersey Dept. of Envt’l Prot., a case that concerned whether a claimant was entitled to reimbursement for damages from the Spill Fund, established by the Spill Compensation and Control Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.11 et seq. 2019 WL 3402917; ___ N.J. ___ (2019). The Appellate Division had upheld an arbitrator’s denial of the claim based on the claimant’s failure to establish a post-Spill Act—i.e., after April 1, 1977—discharge of hazardous substances on its properties. But, in a pointed rebuke, the high court reversed and remanded the matter for a new arbitration hearing based on “flaws in the substantive reasoning of the arbitration decision as well as procedural fairness considerations [that] undermine confidence in the outcome.”
Setting
Superstorm Sandy’s Oct. 29, 2012, landfall resulted in widespread devastation. Approximately 346,000 homes in New Jersey were damaged by the storm’s aftermath, including the claimant’s residential properties in Bayonne.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
