22-Year Cumulative Index
New Jersey Journal
of Environmental Litigation
From November 1989 through December 2011
(Use your browser's FIND command to search this index of
topics, case names and numbers and case developments.)
CLICK HERE TO access index for LATEST ISSUES from January 2012 to present.
HOME
ABANDONMENT OF PROPERTY NJDEP v. Bruce Atkinson Esq. et al. D NJ No. 99-5707 (MLC) DEP asks court not to let abandonment of property go forward until trustee completes ISRA process hazard 6/7/00 P. 6, opinion P. 33.
ABANDONMENT OF PROPERTY NJDEP v Bruce Atkinson Esq. et al. D NJ No. 99-5707 (MLC) Trustee says allegations of hazardous material on property do not prevent abandonment under Midlantic exception hazard 6/7/00 P. 5, brief P. 24
ABANDONMENT OF PROPERTY State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Bruce Atkinson Esq. et al. D NJ No. 99-5707 (MLC) Judge says trustee is able to abandon real property with waste component 6/20/00 P. 4, brief P. 14.
ABOLUTE LIABILITY OF SELLER T & E Industries Inc. v. Safety Light Corp. et al. NJ Supreme Court No. 29,866 NJ Supreme Court ponders whether purchaser can apply strict liability against former owner 12/19/89 P. 19, petition P. 39, reply P. 52, letter to clerk P. 58; Court sets argument for March 12 3/6/90 P. 15; T & E tells Supreme Court that strict liability against former owners will advance cleanups statewide 4/10/90 P. 4, supplemental memorandum P. 18;
ACCESS Deleet Merchandising Corp. v. Newark Group Industries Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4218-94T3 Appellate Div. says Underground Storage Act allows access to other property to determine if contamination migrated 1/22/96 P. 6, opinion P. 24.
ACCESS NJDEP v. Briar Lake Development Corp. D NJ No. 90-1538 (SSB) Judge says swift access to private land near GEMS site is required by SARA and by the public interest 5/22/90 P. 4, opinion P. 13;
ACCESS ROAD/EPA Alloway Samuel v. U.S. EPA 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5118 U.S. tells 3rd Cir. that appeal of order allowing access to property near Ewan Superfund site is moot 3/18/91 P. 12;
ADJUCATORY HEARING Spalt, Evan et al. v. NJDEP Appellate Division Superior Court No. A-3480-87TB Parties that are not aggrieved are not entitled to adjudicatory hearing, panel rules 12/19/89 P. 8, opinion P. 19;
ADJUDICATORY HEARING In Re Stream Encroachment Permit No. 1352-95-0005.10 K. Hovnanian Companies of Jersey Shore Inc. DEP Shinn says third-party group has not claimed any constitutional right to hearing on steam encroachment 12/17/96 P. 6, order P. 64.
ADMINISTRATIVE CONSENT ORDER In Matter of Borne Chemical Co. NJDEP For first time, DEP agrees to assist settlors in pursing non-settlors 11/7/89 P. 15; see issue of 12/5/89 for full text of agreement P. 53;
ADMINISTRATIVE CONSENT ORDERS State of NJ, Dept. of Environmental Protection v. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Christopher Daggett Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1358-90T5F Panel rules Mobil does not have right to pre-enforcement challenge to terms of ACO 3/4/91 P. 4, opinion P. 21;
ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ASSESSMENT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Witco Chemical Corp. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-4124-88T2 Court says clock began on Spill Fund application when NI Industries signed consent order 6/5/90 P. 7, opinion P. 58;
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING In Re Freshwater Wetlands Permit Numbers 1024-94-003.2 Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5187-94T2 Appellate Div. finds permit challengers have no right to hearing of appeal under DEP regulations or APA 11/4/97 P. 8, opinion P. 18.
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING NJDEP v. Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Co. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-2823 899T3F Appellate Division says temporary operating permit may not be revoked without administrative hearing 7/10/90 P. 9, opinion P. 40;
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER AMENDMENT IMO Anchor Carting Corp. OAL No. ESW 6444-91 In this issue: Shinn's decision reversing ALJ and allowing officers of company to be added to lawsuit 1/6/97 P. 11, order P. 30.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER AMENDMENT IMO Anchor Carting Corp. OAL No. ESW 6444-91 Shinn reverses ALJ, allows amendment of administrative order that adds officers of company in Law Division suit 12/3/96 P. 9.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT Delaware Bay Waterman's Association of New Jersey et al. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-7032-96T2 Appellate Div. says DEP acted arbitrarily in second emergency banning of horseshow crabs under APA 9/8/97 P. 7, opinion P. 21.
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES George F. Hutchinson Jr. v. Washington Township et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2355-94T3 Panel says appeal of water quality plan is premature because administrative remedies were not exhausted 3/19/96 P. 9, opinion P. 39.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE News America Publications Inc. et al. v. Albert Spitz et al. D NJ No 89-3450(FHR) Olin Corp.., one of 46 defendants, lists 15 affirmative defenses to contribution complaint in Swope cleanup 1/23/90 P. 13, answer P. 47; Case management order allows amendments to pleadings until Aug. 31, 1990 5/22/90 P. 10;
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Biddle Sawyer Corp. v. American Cyanamid Co. et al. D NJ No. 93-1063 (AET) Magistrate allows prior owners and operators to amend answers to add affirmative defenses and counterclaims 7/22/96 P. 12.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4350 (JFG) Judge strikes affirmative defenses of 16 defendants in Kramer case except allegations of divisibility 3/4/91 P. 4. opinion P. 15;
AGENCY ACTION Raymond Proffitt Foundation-et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al.-E.D. PA-No. 99-4038---Proffitt Foundation says law does not allow Army Corps-discretion in protecting environment from water release--12/28/01 P.10.
AGREEMENT 'GAG PROVISION' Central Bergen Properties v. Crown Leisure Products Inc. and CC Industries Inc. D NJ No. 94-Civ. 4335 (WGB) Judge upholds agreement barring contact with DEP but orders certain material in suit to be submitted to agency 6/8/99 P. 12, opinion P. 48.
AIR CONTAMINATION NJDEP v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. OAL No. EEQ 7150-00 ALJ approves Novartis Pharmaceuticals' agreement to settle $6000 penalty for air contamination for $4500 10/10/00 P. 12.
AIR CONTAMINATION NJDEP v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. OAL No. EEQ 7150-00 Commissioner Shinn approves Novartis's agreement to settle $6000 penalty for air contamination for $4500 10/24/00 P. 12
AIR CONTROL NJDEP v. Honeywell Inc., Gomar OAL No. EEQ 1986-01 Shinn approves reduction of penalty from $26,250 to $17,500 for alleged failure to calibrate monitors 9/27/01 P. 12.
AIR EMISSION CONTROLS In the Matter of American Ref-Fuel Co. of Essex County Administrative Consent Order DEP signs ACO with American Ref-Fuel for state-of-art air emission controls in Essex 1/8/91 P. 11;
AIR EMISSIONS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Newco Inc./Butler Printing & Laminating OAL No. EEQ 3463-95 Settlement with Newco/Butler Printing of air emissions violations at facilities; $12,000 penalty
AIR MONITORING NJDEP v. Reheis Inc. OAL No. EEQ 9701-00 Shinn approves $40,000 penalty for alleged air monitoring violations by Reheis; penalty was originally put at $56,000 8/8/01 P. 11.
AIR PERMIT DEPE V. SES Gloucester, L.P. OAL No. EEQ 4271-91 ALJ reduces penalties for air permit violations against SES Gloucester's waste facility from $68,500 to $8,000 12/21/92 P. 8.
AIR POLLUTION Essex Regional Health Commission v. Taylor Real Estate Management Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4492-97T2 Appellate Division affirm regional health commissions authority over penalties for county air pollution violations 6/20/00 P.6, opinion P. 49.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP V. Precision Hard Chrome Co. OAL, No. EEQ 5986-98 Precision Hard Chrome agreed to settle alleged emission of chromium in stack test for $5,000 2/1/99 P.8.
AIR POLLUTION United States of America et al. v. Brotech Corp. E.D. PA No. 00-2428 Judge finds EPA letter about alleged air pollution violations satisfies notice provision of §113(a) of Clean Air Act 9/29/00 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTION A.O. Polymer Corp. v. NJDEPE, Div. of Environmental Quality Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5749-91T3 Appellate Division bars reduction in $30,000 penalty for air pollution; proof of remediation was missing 7/19/93 P. 4, opinion P. 25.
AIR POLLUTION Air Pollution Permit No. 01892195, IMO Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-1050-89T2 Appellate Division says NJDEP cannot impose conditions on emissions which haven't been determined harmful 6/19/90 P. 10,, opinion P. 31.
AIR POLLUTION American Fuji Seal Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection OAL No. EEQ 9905-96 Shinn affirms DEP 's acceptance of $28,800 settlement of penalties for air pollution that amounted to $53,200 2/3/97 P. 55.
AIR POLLUTION American Fuji Seal Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection OAL No. EEQ 9905-96 DEP accepts $28,800 settlement of penalty assessments for air pollution violations that amounted to $53,200 1/6/97 P. 8, decision P. 28.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT Certech Inc. v. NJDEPE OAL No. EEQ 3945-91 ALJ affirms $1,800 penalty against Certech; finds kil- were altered while applications were being prepared 12/2/91 P. 12.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT Congress Industries Inc. v. NJDEP/Air Quality Permitting OAL No. EEQ 1522-97 Shinn says Congress Industries raises factual issue of whether continuous CO monitoring is reasonable 3/23/98 P.7, decision P. 38. ALJ says Congress Industries raises factual issue of whether continuous CO monitoring is reasonable 2/2/98 P.13, decision P. 34.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Environmental Quality v. Safeway Truck Stop Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-619-91T2 Appellate Div. finds that 'business necessity' does not excuse non-compliance with Air Pollution Control Act3/22/93 P. 7, opinion P. 25.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT Department of Environmental Protection, Air and Environmental Quality Enforcement v. Alden Leeds Inc. OAL No. EE!8213-93 and related appeals ALJ finds company's economic decision resulted in inadequate provision for preventing air pollution 3/7/95 P. 10.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Division of Environmental Quality v. Trofe Incineration Inc. OAL No. EEQ 3996-91 ALJ grants summary decision to DEPE, affirming $55,000 penalty for three violations by incinerator 4/5/93 P. 13.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. RFE Industries Inc. OAL No. EEQ 7773-93 ALJ imposes $8,000 penalty for emissions in violation of temporary certification during stack emission tests 9/5/94 P. 9, decision P. 33.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Alden Leeds Inc. N.J. Supreme Court No. A-50 Sept. Term 1997 Supreme Court declares storage of toxic chemicals offers sufficient nexus for strict liability in fires of unknown origin 3/23/98 P. 4, opinion P. 43.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT NJDEP v. Alden Leeds Inc. Appellate Div. No. A-5265-94T2 Appellate Div. reverses $13,000 in penalties fro release of chemicals during fire, finds no nexus in storing chemicals. 10/21/96 P. 12.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT NJDEPE v. Occidental Chemical Corp. OAL No. EEQ 8487-88 ALJ calls 15-minute notice of chemical release a guide, finds 28 minutes was within 'immediately' definition 7/5/93 P. 7, opinion P. 34.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT/ PENALTIES State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection v. Fairfield Textiles Corp. OAL No. EEQ 5272-92 ALJ approves air pollution settlement that allows $21,400 in individual penalty to be vacated if company cannot pay 3/7/95 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL Barton Press Inc. v. American Environmental International Inc. D NJ No. 94-79 Judge allows most claims in Barton Press's complaint alleging air pollution control equipment is inadequate 2/6/95 P. 7, opinion P. 36.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL IMO Crown/Vista Energy Project, Boiler Stack No. 1, Log 01-92-0857 Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1273-93T1 Appellate Div. applies pre-1990 air control regulation to operation of coal-fueled power plant in W. Deptford 2/6/95 P. 4, opinion P. 5, opinion P. 32.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL In the Matter of the Adoption of Amendments to N.J.A.C. 7:27-16 Appellate Division of Superior Court Panel affirms DEP's auto refinishing emission regulations that do not use averaging 11/23/90 P. 11, opinion P. 38;
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PERMIT American Rendering Corp. (Berkowitz Fat Company Inc. ) v. DEP EHB No. EEQ 458-94 ALJ says continuous emission recordings imposed on American Rendering are within DEP's authority 11/7/94 P. 12, opinion P. 23.
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PERMIT IMO EEA III L.P.mPermit I.D. No. 10095-MFO App ellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6194-92T3 Appellate Div. affirms air pollution control permit for cogeneration plant, 'grandfathered' from Act 10/10/94 P. 49, opinion P. 33.
AIR POLLUTION De Eugenio & Sons v. DEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4055-91T2 Appellate Div. affirms no-fault penalty provision in air pollution regulations when wind blows ash 4/5/93 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTION Department of Environmental Protection v. Gentek Building Products Inc. OAL No. EEQ 4044-96 ALJ recommends 40 percent reduction in air pollution penalties of $66,000 and $32,000 for mitigating factors 12/23/97 p. 9. Shinn accepts reduction of penalties but says DEP is not required to show emissions resulted in environmental harm 5/19/98 P. 11, decision P. 49.
AIR POLLUTION Division of Environmental Quality, DEP v. Prestige Auto Body OAL Nos. EEQ 7345 and 2143-90 ALJ rejects auto body shop's argument that strict liability is not applicable without permit allegations.l 12/24/90 P. 8, opinion P. 38;
AIR POLLUTION Glossy Fruit Farms Inc. v. NJDEP OAL No. EEQ 6674-89 Yaskin approves $1,000 fine for open air burning 12/24/90 P. 11;
AIR POLLUTION Harrison Delivery Service v. DEPE OAL No. EEQ 7244-92 ALJ says ignorance is no defense of air pollution violations, affirms $85,000 penalty instead of $6008/16/93 P. 6, opinion P. 18.
AIR POLLUTION IMO Sidmark Laboratories Corp. Administrative Consent Sidmark Laboratories agrees to $240,000 penalty for violations of Air Pollution Control Act 8/24/92 P. 7, consent order P. 43.
AIR POLLUTION Middlesex County County Utilitites Authority Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6317-9OT2 Appellate Division says state law exempts utility from local air pollution regulations 12/7/92 P. 5, opinion P. 15.
AIR POLLUTION New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Union County Board of Chosen Freeholders OAL No. EEQ 9542-97 ALJ approves Union settlement of air pollution claims 5/19/98 P. 7. Shinn approves Union settlement of air pollution claims 6/2/98 P.11.
AIR POLLUTION New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. O'Brien (Newark) Cogeneration OAL No. EEQ 5284-98 DEP accepts $102,500 to settle $298,000 in penalties for alleged air pollution by predecessor company 5/23/00 P. 9.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP and Environmental Compliance and Enforcement v. U.S. Government, U.S. Military Ocean Terminal, Bayonne, NJ OAL No. EEQ 3330-00 Shinn approves settlement in which U.S. admitted air pollution violations at military terminal in Bayoone 2/5/1 P. 13.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP and Environmental Compliance and Enforcement v. U.S. Government, U.S. Military Ocean Terminal, Bayonne, NJ OAL No. EEQ 3330-00 U.S. admits air pollution violation at military terminal, agrees to revocation of permits over excess emissions 1/23/01 P. 9.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Associated Humane Societies of NJ OAL No. EEQ 10248-99 SETTLEMENT ALJ approves settlement of allegations Humane Societies emitted odors from animal remains incinerator in Newark 1/23/01 P. 8.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Associated Humane Societies of NJ OAL No. EEQ 10248-99 Shinn approves settlement of allegations Humane Societies emitted odors from animal remains incinerator in Newark 1/23/01 P. 12.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Cycle Chem Inc. OAL No. EEQ 3719-00 Shinn adopts settlement in which Cycle Chem agrees to $4,800 penalty and to submit new applications 3/6/1 P. 10.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Lakeville Laminating Corp. OAL No. EEQ 9541-97 Shinn approves $15,000 settlement of penalties totaling $35,400 for alleged emissions, payable over 10 months 1/20/98 P.12.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Lakeville Laminating Corp. OAL No. EEQ 9541-97 ALJ approves $15,000 settlement of penalties totaling $35,400 for alleged emissions, payable over 10 months 1/5/98 P.10.
AIR POLLUTION NJDEP v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. OAL No. EEQ 2141-90 ALJ finds natural gas emission by pile line did not rise to level of statutory 'air pollution 4/22/91 P. 13;
AIR POLLUTION ODORS Borough ofRidgefield v.NJDEP, Div. of Environmental QualityO ALNo. EEQ 4300-91ALJ affirms $2,500 penalty against Ridgefield for air pollution odor from compost pile 5/4/92 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTION PERMIT Independent Energy Producers of New Jersey v. DEPE and Public Service Electric and Gas Co.Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5609-92T5 Panel says DEPE erred in granting air pollution permit for new power plant on same site as previous 7/18/94 P. 13.
AIR POLLUTION State of NJ, DEPE v. Firmenich Inc. OAL No. EEQ 2749-91 ALJ's decision barring penalty for air emission violations during stack test printed 5/4/92 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTION. Deaprtment of Enviro- nmentdal Pro5ection v. Fairfield Textiles Corp. OAL No. EEQ 5272-92 Text of decision on penalty subject to ability to pay The full text of the intial decision on the settlement in an air pollution case that allows vacating $21,400 of penalty if the company cannot pay it, pursuant to the Air Pollution Control Act starts on P. 53. The decision and settlement were summarized in the March 7, 1995 issue on P. 11. 3/20/95 P. 10, opinion P. 53.
AIR POLLUTION/ CONSENT ORDER IMO Wheaton Wheaton agrees to make $5 million in improvements to reduce air pollution and to pay $110,000 in penalities 2/22/93 P.9.
AIR POLLUTION/ GASOLINE VAPORS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. B&G Service Station OAL NO. EEQ 7642-92 Gas station operator agrees to $33,600 settlement for failure to use vapor recovery system 532 days 12/4/95 P. 13.
AIR POLLUTION/ ODORS A.O. Polymer Corp. v. DEPE, Division of Environmental Quality OAL No. EEQ 2739-91 ALJ affirms $10,000 penalty for each of three air pollution violations by A.O. Polymer Corp.5/4/92 P. 10.
AIR POLLUTION/ SAND Division of Environmental Quality, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. McCormack Aggregates Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3086-92T3 Panel says air pollution rules can constitutionally treat windblown stored sand differently than beach sand
AIR POLLUTION/ STACK TEST/ PENALTIES State of NJ, DEPE v. Firmenich Inc. OAL No. EEQ 2749 -91 ALJ bars penalty for air emission violations during stack test because no statute was cited 4/20/92 P. 10.
AIR POLLUTION/CONTAMINATION Rudolph,M.J. Corp. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1576-89T2 DEP investigator's observations, complaint provide residuum of air pollution evidence, appeals court says 11/23/90 P. 4, opinion P. 14;
AIR POLLUTION/ODOR NJDEP v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. OAL No. EEO 2141-90 Weiner's final decision finds natural gas odor emitted from pipe line was no 'air pollution' 7/8/91 P. 4, opinion P. 26.
AIR POLLUTIONAffiliated Manufacturers Inc. v. NJDEPE OAL No. EEQ 2682-91 AFFILIATED MANUFACTURERS INC. V. NJDEPE OAL NO. EEQ 2682-91 ALJ affirms $200 per violation for each of three violations of air pollution control violations 5/18/92 P. 11.
AIR POLLUTON CONTROL ACT Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Occidental Chemical Corp. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2422-93T2 Appellate Division says Occidental Chemical's 28-minute delay in notifying DEP of toxic release was not reasonable 4/10/95 P. 6, opinion P. 27.
AIR POLLUTON CONTROL ACT Department of Environmental Protection v. Township of Middletown Sewerage Authority OAL No. EEQ 10322-93 ALJ says DEP must allege concentration of water to show that equipment must be certified for Air Pollution Control 8/7/95 P. 9, opinion P. 40.
AIR QUALITY NJ DEP v. Precision Hard Chrome Co. OAL No. EEQ 5986-98 Precision Hard Chrome agrees to pay $5,000 penalty for allegedly exceeding chromium emission standard3/16/99 P.12.
AIR QUALITY PLAN Township of Florence v. PA DEP and Waste Management of Pennsylvania Inc. PA Environmental Hearing Board No. 96-045-MG PA board refuses to dismiss township's 'potential to emit' VOC appeal as to state, federal new source review requirements 8/19/96 P. 14.
AIR QUALITY/ WORKSITE Josephine Smith Light Co. et al. v. Jersey Central Power & Light Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3956-91T3 Appellate Div. finds no duty to monitor air quality at worksite for unacceptable levels of asbestos dust 5/9/94 P. 5/9/94 P. 7.
ALLOCATION OF RESPONSE COSTS United States of America v. Atlas Minerals and Chemicals Inc. et al. E.D. PA No. 91-5118 Judge declares 50/50 share between municipal and industrial waste at Dorney Road landfill 9/18/95 P. 7.
AMEND COMPLAINT SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty Co. et al. D NJ No. 95-947 Magistrate lets SC Holdings add Combustion Engineering as direct defendant to Cinnaminson Superfund site suit 10/8/98 P. 8, opinion P. 18.
AONOCAPA New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Merrill Corp. OAL No. EEQ 5782-96 ALJ approves settlement with calling for removal of certain hazardous substances from facility 4/8/97 P. 13.
AONOCAPA New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Merrill Corp. OAL No. EEQ 5782-96 ALJ approves settlement with calling for removal of certain hazardous substances from facility 4/8/97 P. 13.
APPRAISAL/ TAKING State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Harold L. Colombo Jr. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 2070-92T5 Appellate Division says property owners' appraiser should have opportunity to testify on his approach 7/19/93 P. 11, opinion P. 37.
ARBITRATION Camden Co. Municipal Utilities Authority v. Gibbsboro Sewerage Corp. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2878-9OT2 Appellate Div. says $90,522 arbitration award was not for work in designated sewage catego~ries 2/3/92 P. 7, opinion P. 27.
ARBITRATION Pride Solvents & Chemical Co. of New Jersey Inc. v. High Voltage Engineering Corp. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2663-93T2 Panel says former site owner's counterclaim should have been dismissed without prejudice to allow arbitration 4/24/95 P. 8, opinion P. 33.
ASBESTOS IN BUILDINGS Prince George Center Inc. and MBL Life Assurance Corp. etc. v. U.S. Gypsum Co. et al. PA Superior Court No. 531 Phila. 1997 PA appeals court rules Prudential is member of class of federal tenants, barring claims in separate lawsuit 12/8/97 P. 12.
ASBESTOS IN NEW JERSEY BUILDINGS State of Alabama et al. v. W.R. Grace & Co. et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 116, Original NJ petitions U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in asbestos building lawsuit of 29 other states 5/8/90 P. 14; U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs New Jersey and 29 other states 5/22/90 P. 8;
ASBESTOS- IN-BUILDINGS The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al. v. United States Gypsum Co. et al. D. NJ No. 87-4227 and related case. Grace says Prudential seeks to 'cherry pick' nine buildings out of 39 buildings for separate trial as to 'knowledge' 3/4/96 P. 9.
ASBESTOS IN-BUILDINGS The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al. v. United States Gypsum Co. et al. D. NJ No. 87-4227 and related case. Prudential seeks asbestos trial for nine representative buildings out of 39 to set liability of four defendants 1/8/96 P. 7.
ASBESTOS Prince George Center Inc. and MBL Life Assurance Corp. etc. v. U.S. Gypsum Co. et al. Phila. County Court of Common Pleas, PA May Term 1986, No. 5388 PA judge gives reasons fro not allowing Prudentcial to opt out of class action 4/22/97 P.11
ASBESTOS TILE Timony A. Gromen and Applied Environmental Technology Inc. etc. Superior Court, Appellate Division No. A-4117-95T1 NJ appeals court says chipping of asbestos vinyl floor tile requires more stringent separation of work site in building 12/23/97 P. 11.
ASH DISPOSAL FEES IMO Pollution Control Financing Authority of Camden County for Increase in Solid Waste Disposal Rates OAL No. ESW 5408-94 ALJ approves agreement allowing Camden County authority $93.21 per ton ash disposal fee plus surcharge 7/10/95 P. 13a.
ATTORNEY DEPOSITONS Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co. D NJ No. 89-1031 Master allows defendant Grace to depose Hatco's counsel on condition of sale making Grace liable 11/6/90 P. 7; , opinion P. 20;
ATTORNEY Mitchell Environmental Inc. v. Bergen County Utilities Authority and NJ DEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5190-94T2 Panel says judge erred in dismissing case against DEP and Bergen authority when attorney failed to appear 8/19/96 P. 13.
ATTORNEY PRIVILEGE Grand Street Artists et al. v. General Electric Co. et al. D NJ No. 96-3774 Magistrate judge allows discovery of defense attorneys who disclosed data to DEP or take active role in events in issue 4/12/00 P.5, order P. 15. Written communications between Grand Street Artists and attorneys that are 'at issue' are discoverable, judge declares 4/12/00 P.6, order P. 19.
ATTORNEY-CLIENT Bowman, Valcar A. et al. v. Mobil Oil Corp. D NJ No. 87-4093(HAA) Mobil appeals order unsealing papers on alleged effort to shield executives from liability 1/9/90 P. 10, order P. 43;Bowman withdraws appeal 1/23/90 P. 14;
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE In Re Environmental Insurance Declaratory Judgment Actions Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2186-91T3 Appellate Division allows disclosure of client-attorney communications that become material issues in suits 9/21/92 P. 10, opinion P. 37.
ATTORNEY'S FEES South Camden Citizens in Action v. Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5646-99T2 Appellate Division rejects $200,000 in attorney's fees for South Camden Citizens in Action's suit against authority 11/7/01 P. 5, opinion P. 28,
ATTORNEYS FEES Bevan Melissa Ann et al . v. Township of Jackson Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2524-89T1 Panel remands Ayres-related attorney fees; judge incorrectly reduced fee lower than 25 percent 2/18/91 P. 8, opinion P. 43;
ATTORNEY'S FEES Central Bergen Properties v. Crown Leisure Products Inc. and CC Industries Inc. D NJ No. 94 Civ 4335 (WGB) Judge orders evidentiary hearing on whether parties intended attorney's fees as part of remediation account 6/23/98 P.11.
ATTORNEYS' FEES Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5772 Army Corps withdraws 3rd Circuit appeal of ruling that awarded $109,992 attorneys' fees for challenging dumping 1/6/97 P. 7.
ATTORNEYS' FEES Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. D NJ No. 93-2402 (DRD) Judge allows $109,992 in attorneys' fees for groups that challenged dumping of bay sediment in Atlantic Ocean 10/7/96 P. 9, opinion P. 37.
ATTORNEY'S FEES Harry A. Anders et al. v. FPA Corporation et al. D NJ Nos. 93-2830 and related cases Houston General asks 3rd Circuit to review opinion that barred fees for defense similar to action in NJ state court 6/19/95 P. 13.
ATTORNEYS' FEES Marie C. Incollingo et al. v. John B. Canuso Sr. et al. Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-4358-95T3 Appellate Div. says attorneys who won landmark case should get $650,000, not $390,000 allowed by lower court. 2/17/97 P. 6, opinion P. 31.
ATTORNEY'S FEES NJDEP v. Gloucester Environmental Management Services Inc. et al. D NJ No. 84-0152 Liaison counsel for alleged GEMS transporters ask court to require payment of fees and expenses 2/20/90 P. 10, affidavit P. 45;
ATTORNEY'S FEES Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation v. Canon-McMillan School District 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 97-3136 3rd Cir. says lodestar must be used in Clean Air case even though attorney did not object to alternative procedure 8/25/98 P. 7, opinion P. 35.
ATTORNEYS' FEES The Fishbein Family Partnership v. PPG Industries Inc. and PSE&G D NJ No. 93-653 (WHW) Judge finds 'excusable neglect' allows PSE&G to appeal $177,789 in fees and costs despite delay in filing appeal 5/6/96 P.9.
ATTORNEYS' FEES/ REPORTING AND MONITORING Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. D. NJ No. 89-3193 Judge awards $464,052 in fees, $60,846 in expenses to public interest law firm in Magnesium Elektron 1/22/96 P. 8, opinion P. 43.
ATTORNEYS'FEES/ SPILL ACT IMO Spill Compensation and Control Act Claim of Raymond Thomas and Theresa Thomas OAL No. ESF 6993-92 ALJ holds that Spill Act does not authorize payment of attorneys' fees for processing claims and arbitration 3/8/93 P. 10, decision P. 26.
AUTOMATIC-REVOCATION/-CONSENT DECREE--Global Eco-Logical Services Inc. et al.-v. PADEP-Commonwealth Court-No. 125 M.D. 2001---PA appeals court finds automatic provision in consent order -revoking Atlantic Coast Demolition’s permit is not unlawful 12/28/01 P. 12.
BAD FAITH Armotek Industries Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau D NJ No. 88-3110 Judge reopens Armotek discovery against Wausau on bad faith claim under PA law effective July 1 9/11/90 P. 11, opinion P. 47;
BANKRUPCTY/ CERCLA IMO Penn Central Transportation Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-1676 3rd Cir. allows CERCLA claims against Penn Centr~ because reorganization was not 'liquidation type' 10/7/91 P. 7.
BANKRUPRTCY NJDEP v. Bevmar Industries Inc. OAL No. EEQ 5473-90 OAL says Bevmar Industries's appeal of DEP penalty is no longer contested due to bankruptcy lack of funds 11/11/98 P.7, decision P. 23.
BANKRUPTCY NJDEP v. Bevmar Industries Inc. OAL No. EEQ 5473-90 Shinn affirms that Bevmar Industries' appeal of penalty is no longer contested due to bankruptcy lack of funds 12/8/99 P.8/
BANKRUPTCY CLEANUP In Re: Torwico Electronics Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5021 DEPE tells 3rd Circuit that ECRA cleanup cost is not dischargeable unsecured claim in bankruptcy4/19/93 P. 6, brief P. 11. Torwico challenges NJ's argument with 3rd Circuit .that cleanup cost is not dischargeable in bankruptcy 5/10/93 P. 9. Torwico tells 3rd Circuit that cleanup obligation under ECRA is dischargeable unsecured claim 3/22/93 P. 5, brief P. 12.
BANKRUPTCY CODE STAY State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Madison Industries Inc. D NJ No. 93-2347 (GEB) Reversing bankruptcy court, judge rules DEPE compliance orders exempt from automatic stay 11/8/93 P. 8, opinon P. 18.
BANKRUPTCY G-I Holdings Inc. v.Hartford-Accident and Indemnity Co. et al. D NJ No. 01-567 (WGB) Judge says bankruptcy court should determine whether insurers' environmental action is non-core proceeding 9/10/01 P. 7.
BANKRUPTCY In Re: Torwico Electronics Inc.D NJ DEPE's appeal of Bankruptcy Court ruling that bars collection under ECRA is taken under advisement 9/7/92 P. 10.
BANKRUPTCY VENUE In re: Standard Tank Cleaning Corp. E.D. NY Judge grants creditor NJDEPE's motion to transfer Standard Tank bankruptcy from Brooklyn to NJ 12/16/91 P. 6, opinon P. 23.
BANKRUPTCY/ CERCLA The Penn Central Corp. v. United States of America, Consolidiated Rail Corp., and SEPTA U.S. Supreme Court No. 91-761 Penn Central asks U.S. Supreme Court to review 3rd Circuit decision that allows CERCLA claims 12/16/91 P. 10, opinion P. 41.
BANKRUPTCY/ EXPENSE In re Mahoney-Toast Construction Co. Debtor Bankruptcy Court D. NJ No. 92-21622 (NLW) Chapter 7 Bankruptcy judge denies reimbursement for tank removal, citing no 'imminent danger to public' or agency mandate 12/18/95 P. 10.
BANKRUPTCY/ABANDONED PROPERTY In Re: Ferrante, Anthony, & Sons Inc. D NJ No. 88-2449 (GEB) Court found itself powerless to prevent bankruptcy trustee from abandoning a contaminated public water supply 11/6/90 P. 6, opinion P. 26;
BANKRUPTCY/PERMIT REVOCATION Nearapa Rubber Co. v. Judith Yaskin D NJ No. 90-4781 (JCL) Judge Fish refuses to allow DEP to revoke permit for company in bankruptcy to operate plan 1/22/91 P. 6, opinion P. 43;
BEACH ROAD Stephen Cepreghy et al. v. Maurice River Township and NJDEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2633-92T2 Panel says approval of township committee, not its attorney, is needed for Moore's Beach Road settlement . 4/18/94 P. 5, opinion P. 40.
BENEFITS FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS DEPE says study shows benefits from regulations 11/22/93 P.11, summary P. 49.
BID CONSENT OF SURETY Dieso, Donald et al. v. Middlesex County Utilities Authority et al. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-5506-89T5F Appellate Division rejects argument that treatment plant bid was defective because of consent of surety 8/7/90 P. 9;
BID The Original W. Hargrove Demoliiton Co. v. Mayor and Council of the City of Camden Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4978-91T3 .Panel says Camden need not accept bid when bidder has criminal charges involving solid waste pending 5/10/93 P. 11.
BIDDING/ GARBAGE COLLECTION Meadowbrook Carting Company Inc. v. Borough of Island Heights et al. NJ Supreme Court No. A-24-94 NJ Supreme Court says municipalities cannot waive 'consent of surety' accompanying garbage collection bid 12/19/94 P. 7.
BIDS L. Pucillo & Sons, Inc. and Chetcar Realty v. Township of Belleville et al. Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-2102-9OT2 Appellate Division gives bidder more time to provide bond rather than nullify contract, cites public interest 7/22/91 P. 11.
BREACH OF CONTRACT Fallowfield Development Corp. v. Betty R. Strunk et al. v. The Byrn Mawr Trust Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-2019 3rd Circuit denies rehearing of ruling that affirmed $675,000 verdict for purchaser of contaminated site 10/7/96 P. 13
BREACH OF CONTRACT In Re: Sugar- house Realty Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-1136 Buyer asks 3rd Cir. whether excessive contamination is material breach of contract without liability clause 3/4/96 P. 13.
Brownfield Act New Jersey Site Remediation Industry Network et al. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5272-97T3 Text of decision affirming 'ecology-based' regulations that allow DEP oversight of site related to natural resources risks 5/9/00 P. 7, opinion P. 24.
Brownfield Act New Jersey Site Remediation Indusutry Network et al. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5272-97T3 Panel affirms 'ecology-based' regulations giving DEP oversight of remediation related to natural resources risks 4/25/00 P. 7.
BROWNFIELDS/ S. 1070/ MINIMUM STANDARDS Federal Pacific Electric Co. v. NJDEP Superior Court, Law Division, Essex County No. L-002115-98 Federal Pacific Electric says its challenge to DEP's refusal to adopt Brownfield standards belongs in Law Division 7/14/98 P. 4, brief P. 12.
BULKHEAD Baron John Sr. v. NJDEP Div. of Coastal Resources OAL ESA No. 3327-90 ALJ reverses denial of application for bulkhead to develop 100-foot lot and relocate drainage pipe 10/7/91 P. 12.
BULKHEAD Bureau of Coastal Enforcement & Field Services Division of Coastal Resources NJDEP v. John P. Leary Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-222-89T3 Bulkhead does not qualify for exemption, panel says, because it was constructed 33 inches beyond old one 10/23/90 P. 7 , opinion P. 29;
BULKHEAD Walker v. NJEPE OAL No. ESA 6073-89 Owners are ordered to remove bulkhead constructed more than 18 inches out shore of original bulkhead 10/19/92 P. 7, opinion P. 32.
BURDEN OF PROOF Superior Air Products Co. v. NL Industries Inc. NJ Supreme Court No. 32, 106 Superior Air Products asks Supreme Court to compel former owner to prove discharge wasn't contaminated 1/22/91 P. 6, supplemental brief P. 32;
CAFRA American Littoral Society Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn et al. Superior Court, Law Division, Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 Judge orders DEP to provide environmental groups with bi-weekly updates of CAFRA permits in their inactive case 3/16/99 P.1-, order P. 46.
CAFRA American Littoral Society Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn et al. Superior Court, Law Division, Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 Environmental groups ask judge to reactivate their case to compel DEP to promulgate CAFRA coastal planning rules 4/6/99 P. 5, brief P. 14.
CAFRA American Littoral Society Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn et al. Superior Court, Law Division Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 Six environmental groups sue New Jersey for failure to promulgate CAFRA coastal planning rules 11/25/98 P. 6.
CAFRA American Littoral Society Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn et al. Superior Court, Law Division Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 Six environmental groups sue New Jersey for failure to promulgate CAFRA coastal planning rules 11/25/99 P. 6.
CAFRA American Littoral Society Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn Jr. et al. Superior Court, Law Division, Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 Judge orders DEP to publish new CAFRA rule closely coordinated with Development and Redevelopment Plan 5/12/99 P. 5, order P. 47.
CAFRA Charles Biehl v. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 8499-98 Shinn affirms decision that cited secondary dune as buffer during storms in denying CAFRA permit for single house 7/5/00 P. 12.
CAFRA CoreStates/NJ National Bank v. NJDEP OAL No. ESA 8930-97 ALJ says lack of DEP's signature on consent order is no bar to DEP settlement that provides CAFRA permit 7/19/99 P.13.
CAFRA Lois Haas V. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 2939-98 ALJ rejects 'taking' argument after CAFRA petitioner admits she has no basis for arguing effects on dune 5/12/99 P.12.
CAFRA Alan & Judith Fellheimer v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 4731-97 ALJ denies CAFRA waiver for house within 25 feet of bulkhead; nearby houses preexist passage of Act 4/21/98 P. 8, decision P. 29.
CAFRA Alan & Judith Fellheimer v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 4731-97 Shinn denies CAFRA waiver for house within 25 feet of bulkhead; nearby houses preexist passage of Act 5/19/98 P.9.
CAFRA ALDRICH PAT et al. V. NJDEP and Weinder Homes Corp. OAL No. ESA 3326-90 ALJ says due process does not require trial-type hearing in appeal contesting CAFRA permit terms 12/24/90 P. 9;
CAFRA American Littoral Soclety Inc. et al. v. Robert C. Shinn Jr. et al. Superior Court, Law Division, Mercer County No. MER-L-004094-98 DEP settles $50,000 claim for attorney's fees for $37,500 for groups that succeeded in obtaining new CAFRA Rule 5/23/00 P. 7.
CAFRA Avalon Golf & Development Corp. NJDEP Division of Coastal Resources OAL No. ESA 2670-91 ALJ reverses denial of Avalon Golf's CAFRA application to construct facility on golf club 2/17/92 P. 10, decision P. 46.
CAFRA Charles Biehl v. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation Program OALs No. ESA 8499-98 Citing secondary dune on site as a buffer during storms, ALJ denies CAFRA permit for single oceanfront home 3/21/00 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CAFRA Christina Eichbaum vm NJDEP, Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 8528-97 ALJ says house on dune in Ocean County will not violate policy because it will not impact dune function 12/21/99 P. 10.
CAFRA Christina Eichbaum vm NJDEP, Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 8528-97 ALJ says house on dune in Ocean County will not violate policy because it will not impact dune function 12/21/99 P. 10.
CAFRA Coastal Environmental Services Inc. v. K.C. Development Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2089-92T5Appellate Div. affirms award for work done on CAFRA application that later was rejected 11/22/93 P.10, opinion P. 47.
CAFRA CoreStates/NJ National Bank v. NJDEP OAL No. ESA 8930-97 Shinn finds unsigned order with DEP does not bar settlement, but warns about failure to disclose offer 12.21.99, decision P. 55.
CAFRA CoreStates/NJ National Bank v. NJDEP OAL No. ESA 8930-97 Shinn finds unsigned order with DEP does not bar settlement, but warns about failure to disclose offer 12/21/99, decision P. 55.
CAFRA Department of Environmental Protection v. James M. Gallagher d/b/a Anchor Bulkheading OAL No. ESA 257-94 ALJ sets $1,000 penalty for dredging in Barnegat Bay; petitioner said he did not want to wait for DEPE permit 10/10/94 P. 14.
CAFRA Donald Waida v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 4733-97 Reversing, Shinn says lot within a coastal high hazard area cannot be developed without municipal sewer 9/11/98 P.8.
CAFRA Dorothea M. Mutschler et al. V. NJ DEP et al.and Borough of West Cape May Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 6-6072-99T2 Appellate Div. says DEP approval needed for sewer tie-in although Law Division held owner had relied on error 1/23/01 P. 4, opinion P. 31.
CAFRA East Coast Outdoor Advertising/ South Jersey Transportation Authority v. NJDEP/ Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 2263-00 Reversing ALJ's decision, Shinn says appeal of denial of CAFRA application for billboard was not untimely 7/10/01 P.14, decision P. 64.
CAFRA Francis Cisek v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 4734-97 ALJ cites lack of evidence that house and bulkhead would cause minimal feasible adverse impact 8/11/98 P.9, opinion P. 27.
CAFRA Gateway Associates Third Party Hearing Request by American Littoral Society Re CAFRA Major Modification Permit No. 87-0959-5 Issued to Gateway Associates Shinn refuses to relate SMB ruling back to disturb waiver for permit 3/7/94 P. 11, order P. 41.
CAFRA Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmnetal Protection, etc. OAL No. ESA 6573-96 ALJ rejects argument CAFRA permit applicants need not show compliance with Pinelands plan 3/9/98 P.8, decision P. 29.
CAFRA IMO Mystic Estates Realty for a CAFRA Permit Osborn Island Residents Association Inc. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2356-89T2 Appellate Division finds no contested facts required adjudicatory CAFRA hearing on townhouse project 7/22/91 P. 8, opinion P. 25.
CAFRA IMO Ocean County Chapter Inc. of Izaak Walton League etc. CAFRA Pemirt No.1520-98-0009.3 et al. Shinn says general claims for stay of CAFRA permits do not contain convincing proof of irreparable harm 12/28/00 P.13, order P. 22.
CAFRA IMO of Third Party Hearing Request to Appeal the Coastal General Permit Issued to Jack Kassin Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3984-95T3 Appellate Div. says DEP commissioner erred in finding third-party objectors' appeal of CAFRA permit untimely 1/20/98 P.11.
CAFRA IMO SMB Associates v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4609-90T3 Appellate Division's opinion reversing CARB's waiver of CAFRA rules is printed in this issue 5/24/93 P. 11.
CAFRA IMO SMB Associates v. NJDEP Appellate Division ol Superior Court No. A-4609-9OT3 Appellate Div. reverses CARB waiver of CAFRA regulations for a 133-acre project in Egg Harbor 5/10/93 P. 7.
CAFRA James L. Tyson/Tyson Partners v. DEP/Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 0444-97 ALJ affirms denial of CAFRA permit for home; petitioner concedes vacant adjacent lot affects 'infill' 8/11/98 P.10. Shinn affirms denial of CAFRA permit for home; petitioner conceded vacant adjacent lot affects 'infill" 10/21/98 P 11.
CAFRA One Sixteen Inc. et al. v. DEP et al. No. 6076-96 ALJ finds CAFRA bars permits and exception, says residential duplexes are likely subject to flooding. 11/12/97 P.11
CAFRA One Sixteen Inc. Patrick O'Connor et al. v. Department of Environmental Protection, Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 6076-96 Shinn affirms denial of CAFRA permits and exception, agrees residential duplexes are likely subject to flooding 3/23/98 P. 9.
CAFRA PERMIT APPLICATION Darwin Griffith/ Tall Cedars v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 2667-94T5 Panel affirms dismissal of CAFRA application, cites failure to exhaust administrative remedy 6/11/96 P. 7, opinion P. 30.
CAFRA R.D. Doss Inc. (West-Westerly Extension) v. NJDEP OAL No. ESA 00864-97 ALJ says that site for dwelling units in CAFRA area cannot be approved unless consent judgment terms are satisfied 4/21/98 P.7, decision P. 15.
CAFRA R.D. Doss Inc. v. NJDEP OAL No. ESA 00864-97 Shinn says site for dwelling units in CAFRA area cannot be approved unless consent judgment terms are satisfied 7/28/98 P. 8.
CAFRA REVIEW SMB Associates (Anchoring Point) v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection et al. New Jersey Supreme Court No. 36, 863 Supreme Court agrees to consider ruling that allows non-participants in CARB proceeding to seek review 2/6/93 P. 5, brief P. 30 Supreme Court will hear arguments March 14 on DEPE authority to waive CAFRA rules without procedures 3/7/94 P. 12. Supreme Court rules non-participant in administrative proceedings has standing to review CARB decision 5/9/94 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CAFRA Robert L. Walter and Lynne Podeswa Walter v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-0428-96T2 Appellate Div. says M.L.U.L. provides authority for dune ordinance that restricts development as CAFRA condition 6/24/97 P. 9, opinion P. 19.
CAFRA Steen Outdoor Advertising Inc. v. DEP. Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 10444-98 ALJ says commercial sign fails standards relative to wetlands, denies application for CAFRA permit 11/23/99 P.10, opinion P. 13
CAFRA Steen Outdoor Advertising Inc. v. DEP. Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 10444-98 ALJ says commercial sign fails standards relative to wetlands, denies application for CAFRA permit 11/23/99 P.10, opinion P. 13
CAFRA Steen Outdoor Advertising Inc. v. DEP. Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 10444-98 ALJ says commercial sign fails standards relative to wetlands, denies application for CAFRA permit 11/23/99 P.10, opinion P. 13
CAFRA/ CONDITIONAL APPROVAL Hovsons Inc. and Homeland Corp. v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program Appellate Division of Superior Court No.A-3220-99T2 Appellate Div. affirms Shinn's refusal to allow review of CAFRA application before WQM plan is addressed 7/10/01 P. 10.
CAFRA/ CONDITIONAL APPROVAL Hovsons Inc. and Homeland Corp. v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 00306-98S ALJ refuses to apply conditional approval mechanism to application for CAFRA permit to determine disputes 11/9/99 P. 9.
CAFRA/ CONDITIONAL APPROVAL Hovsons Inc. and Homeland Corp. v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 00306-98S ALJ refuses to apply conditional approval mechanism to application for CAFRA permit to determine disputes 11/9/99 P. 9.
CAFRA/ DEED RESTRICTION/DUNE Walter Blejwas v. NJDEP/LURP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A 875-98T1 Appellate Division says appeal of decision on dune is moot because Shinn did not require owner to deed restrict parcel 3/9/00 P. 6, opinion P. 22.
CAFRA/ DEED RESTRICTION/DUNE Walter Blejwas v. NJDEP/LURP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A 875-98T1 Appellate Division says appeal of decision on dune is moot because Shinn did not require owner to deed restrict parcel 3/9/00 P. 6, opinion P. 22.
CAFRA/ FISHING IMO Third Party Appeal by Garden State Seafood Association Inc. etc DEP Permit No. 1500-96-0002.5 and related appeal. Shinn says fishing group lacks particularized property interest for hearing on permits for undersea phone cables hazard 6/7/00 P. 13, decision P. 38.
CAFRA/ SEWERAGE Daniel Seneco and John Linnington v. NJDEPE Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-2772-92T3 Appellate Div. says developers must be allowed to show whether 'sewerable' subdivision will impact environment 10/10/94 P. 46, opinion P. 48.
CAFRA/ WAIVERS In Re CAFRA Permit No. 87-0959-5 Issue to Gateway Associates Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 3868-93T5 Appellate Div. says DEP cannot waive bay island policy without standards for exercising CAFRA waiver authority 5/21/96 P. 4, opinion P. 54.
CAFRA/ WAIVERS In Re CAFRA Permit No. 87-0959-5 Issued to Gateway Associates NJ Supreme Court No. A-2-97 Reversing, NJ Supreme Court says environmental group's failure to appeal CAFRA permit bars appeal of modification 1/5/98 P.6, opinion P. 33.
CAFRA/ WAIVERS Third Party Hearing Request by American Littoral Society Re Extension of CAFRA Permit No. 87-0959-5 Issued to Gateway Associates on Oct. 18, 1989 Shinn rejects American Littoral's request for hearing on Gateway project but stays certain construction work 3/17/97 P. 8, decision P. 20.
CAFRA/DUNES Christina Eichbaum v. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 8528-97 Shinn approves stipulation for new house on pilings that ALJ said does not violate dune policy of CERCLA/ ARRANGER Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery &Tire Service et al.M.D. PANo. 3-CV-91-1714 In response, Gould insists SREA is not intended to exempt material that never loses its characteristic as waste 6/20/00 P. 5.
CAPACITY TO CONTROL/ SPILL ACT Analytical Measurements Inc. et al. v. The Keuffel & Esser Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-2523 (DRD) Judge dismisses individual liability claims against former K&E official under Sprill Act but not CERCLA 2/22/93 P.5, opinion P. 13.
CAPACITY TO CONTROL/SPILL ACT Analytical Measurements Inc. etalv. TheKeuffe& Esser Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-2523 (DRD) Plaintiffs in 'capacity to control' case under Spill Act and CERCLA say summary judgment is premature 11/9/92 P. 6, brief P. 50.
CAPACITYTO CONTROLAnalytical Measurements Inc. et al. v. The Keuffel & Esser Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-2512 (DRD) 'Capacity to control' theory being argued in CERCLA lawsuit against retired, former president of company 10/5/92 P. 8, brief P. 66.
CARBON MONOXIDE New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Schering Corp. OAL No. EEQ 6545-95S Schering settles carbon monoxide citation 12/18/95 P. 11.
CASE MANAGEMENT United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ NO. 89-43409 (G) Kramer case management order names six liaison counsel and dates fro settlement process protocol 3/18/91 P. 13;
CASE MANAGEMENT United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340(G) 141 new third-party defendants are added in amended third-party complaint in Kramer 11/4/91 P. 6, order P. 29.
CAUSAL LINK Vuocolo, Mary Ann v. Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co. et al. Appellate Division, Superior Court No. A-3551-88T2 Lacks of causal link is fatal to appeal in personal injury toxic tort action against Diamond Shamrock 5/8/90 P. 11, opinion P. 47;
CAUSATION In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 88-1973 3rd Circuit allows SEPTA to argue for Paoli rehearing 11/23/90 P. 5;
CAUSATION/ STANDING Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth Inc. v. Mag nesium Elektron Inc.No. 92-5161 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. 3rd Cir. rejects argument that ruling in environmenta case makes causation irrelevant to a group's standing 1/11/93 P. 4, order P. 12, petition for rehearing P. 12. 3rd Cir bars rehearing 1/25/93 P. 9.
CAUSATION/STANDING NPDES Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth Inc. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-5161 Magnesium Elektron faults 3rd Circuit for concluding cause is irrelevant to standing in environmental cases 1/11/93 P. 4, petition P. 12.
CEIL PIERCING/ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT Mobday Corp. v. Allied-Signal Inc. D NJ No. 89-4268 Judge finds Allied cannot use assumption agreement as defense because it lacked clear release of liability 5/20/91 P. 8;
CERCAINNOCENT OWNER Grand Street Artists et al. v. General Electric Co. et al. D NJ No. 96-3774 Judge reaffirms decision that unit owners in condominium partnership are not entitled to 'innocent purchaser' defense 5/9/00 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) SC Holdings withdraws attempt to appeal dismissal of all its CERCLA generator liability claims against Hoeganaes 11/11/98 P.6.
CERCLA United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 Keystone Sanitation landfill owners agree to cleanup to control source of contamination at cost of $5.5 million 10/10/00 P. 8.
CERCLA Outlet City Inc. v. West Chemical Products Inc. D NJ No. 91-1564(JAG) Judge finds genuine issues of fact as to quality of cleanup bars summary judgment to either party in CERCLA case 12/8/99 P.7, opinion P. 52.
CERCLA Outlet City Inc. v. West Chemical Products Inc. D NJ No. 91-1564(JAG) Judge finds genuine issues of fact as to quality of cleanup bars summary judgment to either party in CERCLA case 12/8/99 P.7, opinion P. 52.
CERCLA United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 U.S. lodges final set of 34 de micromis settlements in Keystone Landfill case for nominal sum of $1.00 1/20/99 P.10.
CERCLA §107(a) Biddle Sawyer Corp. v. American Cyanamid Co. D NJ No. 93-1063 (AET) Judge says Biddle Sawyer cannot proceed against Stepan under CERCLA §107(a), only for contribution under §113 11/4/97 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA / EVIDENCE United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Judge says evidence supports assumption that Stepan waste was disposed of at Ewan and D'Imperio Superefund sites 7/19/99 P. 5, opinion P. 22.
CERCLA / CONSENT DECREE United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 U.S. and PA DEP move for consent decree with 376 settling third and fourth party defendants in Keystone Landfill United States and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 9/11/98 P.13.
CERCLA / CONTINUING VIOLATIONS Fallowfield Development Corp. et al. v. Leonard M. Strunk et al. E.D. PA No. 89-7544 Judge applies CERCLA liability to pre-enactment dumping in PA, cites alleged "continuing" violations 5/22/90 P. 6;
CERCLA / DE MINIMIS CONSENT DECREE United States v. Rohm & Haas Co. et al. v. John Cuccinotta et al., D NJ No. 85-4386 10 de minimis defendants dismissed 11/7/89 P.4, opinion P. 45; Rohm and Haas contends de minimis dismissal was based on $26-million estimate instead of $65 million 11/21/89 P. 4, memorandum and exhibits P. 18, Triangle Publications' opposition P. 29; Triangle, DuPont say de minimis reconsideration motions do not raise any new legal arguments 11/21/89 P. 6, DuPont's motion P. 23, reconsideration motion P. 18; Gov't insists CERCLA gives EPA initial decision whether parties satisfy de minimis criteria 12/5/89 P.4, U.S. reply P. 17; Gov't says Manor Health Care fails to concisely identify matters overlooked in de minimis settlement 12/5/89 P. 6, Gov't's reply P. 17; Owens-Illinois asks for reconsideration of order to pay Rohm & Haas' discovery costs in Lipari case 12/5/89 P. 7, affidavit P. 22; Judge denies reconsideration de minimis decree, finds no overlooked matters in settlement approval 12/19/89 P.4, opinion P. 26; Magistrate says Rohm and Haas disclosed production records but orders any privileged documents indexed 12/19/89 P.6, opinion P. 31; Magistrate compels Owens-Illinois to provide liquid waste data from state court case 12/19/89 P. 8, order P. 28; Manor Health files notice of 3rd Circuit appeal 1/9/90 P. 7, notice of appeal P. 21; 3rd Cir. sets briefing schedule 1/23/90 P. 7; Owens-Illinois moves anew to compel Rohm and Haas to produce records on waste 2/20/90 P. 6, affidavits Pages 26, 32, 35; Manor Health Care faults de minimis settlements in 3rd Cir. brief 3/6/90 P. 4, brief P. 18; U.S. moves to dismiss appeal for lack of jurisdiction 3/6/90 P. 6, brief P. 26; 3rd Cir. dismisses Manor Health Care's appeal 3/20/90 P. 5; Rohm and Haas denies withholding documents on drums hauled to Lipari 3/20/90 P. 9; De minimis settlors Triangle, DuPont and Hercules seek dismissal of contributions, indemnity claims 5/8/90 P. 7, memorandum of law P. 38;
CERCLA / PREEMPTION Caldwell Trucking PRP Group v. Caldwell Trucking Co. Oinc. Et al. D NJ No. 00-5463 (DMC) Finding CERCLA does not completely preempt state law, judge remands Caldwell Trucking PRP suit to state court 5/22/01 P. 7, opinion P. 34.
CERCLA / RESPONSE COSTS Schuyklill County Industrial Development Authority v. Tonolli Company of Canada Ltd. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 00-8400 Schuykill authority appeals ruling that $250,000 settlement flows from indemnity agreement and is not response cost 8/18/00 P. 8.
CERCLA / United States of America v. Compaction Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Judge grants settlors' motion to quash Keuffel & Esser's deposition of DEP inspector in dispute over waste volume 8/28/00 P. 5, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA /AMENDED COMPLAINT NJDEP v. Almo Anti-Pollution Services Corp. et al. D NJ No. 89-4380 (JFG) New Jersey's amended complaint in Kramer site case names two dozen more defendants than U.S. 5/22/90 P. 9;
CERCLA CHAPTER 1 1 Penn Central Corp. v. United States of America, Consolidated Rail Corp. et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 91-761 SEPTA, Conrail ask Supreme Court not to review ruling allowing CERCLA claims against Penn Central 1/6/92 P. 10.
CERCLA CLAIMS/ BANKRUPTCY Penn Central Corp. v. United States of America et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 91-761 Supreme Court refuses to review ruling that allows CERCLA claims against reorganized company 3/9/92 P. 12.
CERCLA CONSENT DECREE New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy et al. v. The Carborundum Co. et al. D NJ No. 94-1473 (WGB) Judge approves CERCLA consent decree involving nine parties with EPA and DEP over Caldwell Trucking site 1/9/95 P. 6, opinion P. 47.
CERCLA CONTRIBUTION / SETTLEMENT Transtech Industries .etal.v.A&Z Septic Clean et al. D NJ No. 2-90-2578 (HM) Magistrate judge orders Transtech parties in Kin-Buc case to pay recoveries from insurance proceeds to paying agent 11/27/00 P. 5, order P. 32.
CERCLA CONTRIBUTION Amland Properties Corp. v. Aluminum Company of America et al. v. Tri-Terminal Corp. et al. D NJ No. 86-1830 (MTB) Settling CERCLA private party must.extinguish claims against non-settling party before contribution 1/25/93 P. 4, opinion P. 40.
CERCLA CONTRIBUTION In Re: Sharon Steel Corp. Debtor, Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Sharon Steel Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-3274 3rd Cir. orders court to reconsider rejecton of ARCO's contribution claims for $470 million cleanup in Utah 12/11/90 P. 9, opinion P. 66;
CERCLA DISPOSAL OUT OF STATE IMO Essex County Utilities Authority DEPE Docket No. CTO 3940022 Shinn approves emerency contracts for Essex County ash to be transported to two landfills in Pennsylvania 4/4/94 P. 11a
CERCLA 'DISPOSAL' States, John and Bridget et al. v. BFG Electroplating Co. W.D. PA No. 86-2093 Judge affirms ruling that cinder block sale was "disposal" and thus "release" under CERCLA 4/10/90 P. 15;
CERCLA EVIDENCE United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Judge denies Joint Defense Group's motion to declare Stepan severally liable, finds counter evidence raises doubt 7/19/99 P. 8.
CERCLA FINES United States of America v. LeCarreaux and Lightman Drum Co.D NJ $3.9-million Superfund fine, largest ever in nati~n and with treble damages, imposed in New Jersey 3/9/92 P. 6.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 3rd Cir. still considering U.S. motion to rehear opinion on CERCLA liability of U.S. for World War II site 2/21/94 P. 9.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, e t al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 3rd Cir. grants U.S.'s motion to hear in banc CERCLA opinion on liability of U.S. for World War II facility 3/7/94 P. 12, order P. 58.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 U.S. will not ask Supreme Court to review liability of U.S. for cleanup of private World War II facility 10/10/94 P. 10.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 3rd Cir. denies reconsideration of US joint and several liability under CERCLA for war plant contamination 2/7/94 P. 11.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 3rd Cir. upholds massive joint and several liability by U.S. under CERCLA as 'arranger' of war production 2/6/93 P. 7, opinon P. 58.
CERCLA FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 United States says 3rd Circuit should address liability of U.S. as operator and arranger, not just one or other 6/6/94 P. 10.
CERCLA Horsehead Indusries Inc. v. Paramont Communications Inc. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 99-3865 3rd Cir. says NY ruling on contract indemnity can be used to estop collaterally CERCLA contribution claim 7/26/01 P. 13.
CERCLA JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY The Borough of Sayreville et al. v. Union Carbide Corp. et al. D NJ No. 94-5674 (AJL) Judge says joint and several liability against U.S. under Section;107(a) is not available to Sayreville and other plaintiffs 5/6/96 P.8, opinion P. 56.
CERCLA LIABILITY / RAIL ACT The Penn Central Corp. v. The United States of America, Consolidated Rail Corp. et al. Special Court Regional Rail Reorganizaiton Act of 1973 Special Court finds SEPTA, Conrail, Amtrak are not liable for prior PCB contamination of Paoli railyard
CERCLA LIABILITY Gould Inc. v. A& M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3:CV-91-1714 Judge allocates 25 percent of damages to battery suppliers although Gould is viable owner of Marjol battery site 9/23/97 P.10
CERCLA LIABILITY Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn v. All-State Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 Judge rules Grace jointly and severally liable to Hatco under CERCLA; Spill Act contribution awaits NCP trial 10/18/93 P. 4, opinion P. 48.
CERCLA LIABILITY/ DIVISIBILITY United States of America v. Alcan Aluminum Corp 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91 -5481 3rd Cir. affirms right of PRP to establish divisibility of harm 6/1/92 P. 5, opinion P. 20.
CERCLA ORPHAN SHARES Gould Inc. v. A&M Battery and Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 91-1714 Judge affirms ruling that Marjol defendants are not responsible to Gould for 'orphan shares' 2/5/96 P. 10, opinion P. 57.
CERCLA OVERSIGHT COSTS United States of America v. Louis Serafini and City of Scranton v. Lackawanna Refuse Removal Inc. M.D. PA No. 3:cv-86-1591 Judge finds that CERCLA bars U.S. reimbursement for oversight costs in private party remedial action 1/23/95 P. 9, opinion P. 49.
CERCLA OVERSIGHT COSTS United States of America v. Rohm and Haas Co. et al. 3rd Circuit U.S. C.A. No. 92-1517 3rd Cir. says EPA cannot recover oversight costs such as consulting and administrative for private cleanups 9/6/93 P.7, opinion P. 21.
CERCLA SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) Judge dismisses CERCLA generator liability claims against Hoeganaes based on wording in 1975 letter agreement 8/11/98 P.5, certification P. 26.
CERCLA SECTION 107 New Castle County; Rhone-Poulenc, Inc.; Zeneca Inc. v. Halliburton NUS Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7443 3rd Cir. denies rehearing of opinion PRP may not seek Section 107 cost recovery from other PRPs; dissent filed 6/10/97 P. 7, order/petition P. 26.
CERCLA SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Berks Associates et al. E.D. PA No. 91-4868 22 parties - 14 companies and eight federal agencies - agree to reimburse EPA $13.8 million for Douglassville site 4/24/01 P. 11.
CERCLA The Hartz Mountain Corp. et al. v. The General Motors Corp. D NJ No. 94-4814 (WHW) Judge finds General Motors liable for contribution under CERCLA and Spill Act for cleanup triggered by ECRA 9/22/98 P.10, opinion P. 55.
CERCLA United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 Judge dissolves injunction so that Keystone parties' assets can go toward $5.5-million cleanup of landfill 12/12/00 P. 8.
CERCLA United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 Waste Management says $4.25 million cash-out payment for 376 third and fourth party defendants is premature 10/8/98 P. 11, briefs P. 35, 42.
CERCLA United States v,. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4390(JFG) U.S. sues 22 parties to recover $2 million CERCLA response costs fro Kramer Landfill cleanup 12/5/89 P. 16, complaint P. 43; Alleged hauler contends United States failed to use cost effective means in recovery 4/24/90 P. 11;
CERCLA/ ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 Occidental Chemical says failure to produce evidence of damage justifies refusal to apply alternative liability 6/8/99 P. 5.
CERCLA/ ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 N.J. Turnpike Authority tells 3rd Cir. alternative liability under CERCLA ensures generator defendants bear costs 5/25/99 P. 4, brief P. 29.
CERCLA/ ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 PPG Industries tells 3rd Cir. that N.J. Turnpike Authority cannot claim alternative liability because it is not innocent 6/8/99 P. 4, brief P. 56.
CERCLA/ ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 AlliedSignal says NJ Turnpike Authority is not victim but at least 'partially responsible' for contamination at sites 6/8/99 P. 6.
CERCLA/ ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 Replying to generator defendants, NJ Turnpike Authority tells 3rd Circuit why alternative liability is applicable 6/22/99 P. 4, brief P. 49.
CERCLA/ ARBITRATION Outlet City Inc. v. West Chemical Products Inc. D NJ No. 91-1564(JAG) Judge refers Outlet City's case involving quality of CERCLA cleanup of NY site for arbitration 2/24/00 P. 9.
CERCLA/ ARRANGER Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 3rd Cir. will hear recycler defendants argument that SREA exempts parties that supply material
CERCLA/ ASBESTOS Oakite Products Inc. v. Celotex Corp. et al. D NJ No. 89-992 Celotex liable under CERCLA for contamination of Metuchin plant sold to Oakite in 960, judge says 7/24/90 P. 9, opinion P. 31;
CERCLA/ ASSET DISCOVERY United States of America v. David Ehrlich E.D. PA No. 95-661 Judge rules EPA's demand for personal financial data does not violate PRP's privacy, equal protection rights 4/21/98 P.9, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA/ BILL OF COSTS Amland Properties Corp. v. Aluminum Company of America D NJ No. 86-1830 Magistrate finds Alcoa liable for costs although it settled with Amland, against whom defendants prevailed 10/9/95 P. 9, opinion P. 17.
CERCLA/ CITIZEN SUITS Clinton County Commissioners and Arrest the Incinerator Remediation Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 97-541 U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari in Third Circuit ruling that CERCLA citizens' suit must await EPA's remedial action 1/20/98 P. 7.
CERCLA/ CONSPIRACY United States of America v. America Recovery Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3975 3rd Cir. denies Fiore's petition for reargument based on his incarceration and ultimate loss of landfill business 8/28/00 P. 8.
CERCLA/ CONSPIRACY United States of America v. America Recovery Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3975 3rd Cir. rejects landfill owner's contention that he was denied due process in rejection of his counterclaim 8/18/00 P. 9, opinion P. 47, rehearing petition P. 10.
CERCLA/ CONSPIRACY United States of America v. American Recovery Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3975 Owner says panel ignored fact of his incarceration and ultimate loss of his landfill business, seeks rehearing 8/18/00 P. 9, opinoin P. 47, rehearing petition P. 10.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compaction Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge denies reconsideration of his denial of Keuffel & Esser's motion to depose DEP inspector 9/15/00 P. 11.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compacting Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge says settlement by PRP with U.S. satisfies common liability for settling parties to pursue contribution 2/8/00 P. 7, opinion P. 40.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compacting Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge reinstates order granting settlors' claim on CERCLA contribution liability against Keuffel & Esser 12/21/99 P.5, opinion P. 14.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compacting Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge reinstates order granting settlors' claim on CERCLA contribution liability against Keuffel & Esser 12/21/99 P.5, opinion P. 14.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compacting Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge says settlement by PRP with U.S. satisfies common liability for settling parties to pursue contribution 2/8/00 P. 7, opinion P. 40.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compacting Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge reinstates order granting settlors' claim on CERCLA contribution liability against Keuffel & Esser 12/21/99 P.5, opinion P. 14.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Compaction Systems Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5349 (KSH) Magistrate judge denies Keuffel & Esser's cross motion for sanctions against third-party defendants in Combe 3/9/00 P. 11.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Marvin Pesses et al. W.D. PA No. 90-0654 Judge declares Bay Metal liable for $1.49 million share of settling parties' Superfund costs at Metcoa Radiation Site 4/12/00 P.12, opinion P. 34.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION/ INDEMNITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 Judge allows limited disclosure of EPA-Elf Atochem settlement documents; at issue is liability of Witco 12/5/94 P.4, Opinion P. 12.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION/ INDEMNITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 Judge refuses to allow Witco to argue that EPA's remedy for Myers Superfund site is 'capricious and arbitrary' 5/8/95 P. 13.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION/ INDEMNITY Witco v. Jeanne V. Beekhuit et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 93-7837 3rd Cir. rules three-year CERCLA statute of limitations does not preempt state nonclaim statutes as to estates 10/10/94 P. 4, opinon P. 15.
CERCLA/ CONTRIBUTION/ SETTLEMENT Transtech Industries Inc. et al. v. A & Z Septic Clean et al. D. NJ No. 2-90-2578 (HAA) Transtech plaintiffs seek approval of settlements barring indemnity and contribution claims in Kin-Buc Landfill case 5/5/98 P. 5, brief P. 27. Magistrate judge finds Transtech plaintiffs and SCA Parties time barred from reopening claims against two defendants 6/23/98 P. 4, opinion P. 18.
CERCLA/ CROSS CLAIMS Stearns & Foster Bedding Co. v. Franklin Holding Corp. et al. D NJ No. 94-0967 Judge approves Stearns & Foster settlement and dismissal of cross-claims against settling defendants 12/17/96 P. 7, opinion P. 27.
CERCLA/ DAMAGES Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn.. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 Judge allocates damages to current owner and against former owner for remediation activities at Fords site 3/21/94 P. 4, opinion P. 12.. Judge awards $12 million to Hatco in final judgment that includes supplemental stipulation with Grace 5/23/94 P. 5, opinion P. 17.
CERCLA/ DEFUNCT CORPORATION Global Landfill Agreement Group v. 280 Development Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5338 (NHP) Judge says corporation cannot be sued under CERCLA or Spill Act after assets are distributed and affairs wound up 2/17/98 P.7, opinion P. 20. Judge denies reconsideration of ruling that corporation cannot be sued under CERCLA after assets are distributed 3/9/98 P. 6.
CERCLA/ DISCOVERY United States of America v. Union Corp. et al. E.D. PA No. 80-1589 Metal Bank defendants obtain stipulation allowing discovery of Coast Guard names involved in ROD 4/24/01 P. 10.
CERCLA/ DISCOVERY United States of America v. Union Corp. et al. E.D. PA No. 80-1589 EPA insists defendants have no legal basis for discovery into reasonablenss of site remedy under language of CERCLA 3/6/1 P. 6, brief P. 20.
CERCLA/ DISCOVERY United States of America v. Union Corp. et al. E.D. PA No. 80-1589 Metal Bank defendants seek discovery of persons who rendered record of decision and factual bases for response 3/6/1 P. 8, notice P. 26.
CERCLA/ EVIDENCE United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Judge finds Joint Defense Group has established several liability under §113 for past and future costs at two sites 7/19/99 P.7, opinion P. 30.
CERCLA/ EXPERTS Vineland Construction Co. v. Universal-Rundle Corp. D NJ No. 92-3115 Magistrate awards expert costs and fees against Vineland Construction for submitting second report 1/22/96 P. 5, opinion P. 27.
CERCLA/ FAILURE TO DISCLOSE United States of America v. Ernest Barkman et al. E.D.PA No. 96-6395 PADEP v. Barkman E.D. PA No. 98-1180 Landfill owner asks court to vacate $8.5-million order, says EPA failed to disclose relevant report on landfill 1/20/99 P.7, motion P. 15.
CERCLA/ FAILURE TO DISCLOSE United States of America v. Ernest Barkman et al. E.D.PA No. 96-6395 Judge says landfill report, disclosed to defendant after ruling, is not evidence that EPA's action was arbitrary 2/16/99 P. 9, opinion P. 48.
CERCLA/ FIFTH AMENDMENT United States of America v. David Ehrlich E.D. PA No. 95-661 Judge refuses to find Ehrlich waived Fifth Amendment rights for failure to assert defense in Strasburg Landfill case 6/2/98 P.9.
CERCLA/ FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE David Ehrlich v. Janet Reno 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. 94-2220 3rd Circuit remands claim that EPA's demand for financial data violate due process, to be considered with compliance 9/18/95 P. 5, opinion P. 11.
CERCLA/ FOIA Viacom International Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency E.D. PA No. 95-2243 EPA seeks reconsideration of order to disclose data to PRP regarding tests and properties related to Palmerton, PA site 1/8/96 P. 12.
CERCLA/ FOIA Viacom International Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency E.D. PA No. 95-2243 Judge rejects EPA motion to bar disclosure of data to PRP 2/5/96 P. 11, opinion P. 18.
CERCLA/ HAZARDO US SUBSTANCES Alcan Aluminum Corp. v United States of America et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 96-1494 Alcan asks Supreme Court to review 3rd Circuit ruling on need for proof of 'environmentally harmless' substances 5/21/97 P. 7.
CERCLA/ HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES Alcan Aluminum Corp. v United States of America et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 96-1494 Supreme Court declines to review 3rd Circuit ruling on need for proof of 'environmentally beneign' substances 7/21/97 P. 7.
CERCLA/ HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES Alcan Aluminum Corp. v United States of America et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 96-1494 Three companies ask U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari on whether CERCLA created retroactive liability 5/21/97 P. 5, petition P. 38.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY AGREEMENT Curtis T. Bedwell and Sons Inc. v. Geppert Brothers Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2735-93T5 Panel says indemnification agreements for CERCLA claims are enforceable between contracting parties 4/10/95 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1664 Rohm and Haas lists issues to be presented for 3d Circuit review of ruling that sale agreement makes company liable 8/21/95 P. 9, statement P. 24.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1664 SmithKline tells 3rd Cir. that Rohm & Haas indemnity clause covers all Whitmoyer environmental liabilities 12/4/95 P. 10.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1644 Rohm and Haas seeks 3d Cir. review of ruling that sales agreement makes company liable under successor liability 8/7/95 P. 10.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1664 3rd Cir. rejects SmithKline petition for rehearing of ruling which held Rohm and Haas is not liable under agreement 8/19/96 P. 6.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1664 3rd Cir. to hear arguments March 14 on Rohm & Haas contention that indemnity does not cover all liabilities 1/22/96 P. 13.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-1664 Reversing, 3rd Circuit says Rohm and Haas is not liable under agreement to SmithKline for Myerstown cleanup 7/22/96 P. 9.
CERCLA/ INDEMNITY SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Rohm and Haas Co. E.D. PA No. 92-5394 Judge says trial must determine Rohm & Haas pre-sale liability 6/20/94 P. 9.
CERCLA/ INNOCENT OWNER Grand Street Artists et al. v. General Electric Co. et al. D NJ No. 96-3774 Condominium owners seek reconsideration of decision that they are not entitled to 'innocent owner' defense 1/20/99 P. 10
CERCLA/ INTERVENE United States of America v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. D NJ No. 98-2045 Judge finds Wayne has no right to intervene in litigation over Grace site without contractual, statutory law support 4/20/99 P.8, opinion P. 47
CERCLA/ JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY United States of America v. Hughes, Hubbard & Reed v. USX Corp., Atlantic Disposal Service et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5681 3rd Cir. sees error in assuming joint shareholder liability based on day-to-day control instead of actual participation 11/6/95 P. 4, opinion P. 36.
CERCLA/ JUDICIAL REVIEW United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S. C.A. No. 93-5252 3rd Cir. allows judicial review of EPA cleanup program continuation when owner alleges harm to environment8/22/94 P. 4, opinion P. 17.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.l.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 OHM tells 3rd Cir. that CERCLA preempts state nuisance claims and bars private parties' suit over remedial action 11/25/99 P. 4, brief P. 45.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.l.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 OHM tells 3rd Cir. that CERCLA preempts state nuisance claims and bars private parties' suit over remedial action 11/25/99 P. 4, brief P. 45.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.l.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 EPA tells 3rd Cir. that CERCLA preempts state nuisance claims and bars private parties' suit over remedial action 1/20/99 P.5, brief P. 21
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.l.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 Citizens' group says EPA misreads Clinton County as opposing preservation of state nuisance claims 1/20/99 P. 6.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.l.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 EPA tells 3rd Cir. that appeal is moot because incineration of soil has occurred; citizens group fears other nuisances 5/25/99 P. 14.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-7341 Parties in 3rd Cir. appeal argue impact of ruling in Steel on nuisance claim in environmental suit 3/2/99 P. 7.
CERCLA/ JURISDICTION Arrest the Incinerator Remediation (A.I.R.) Inc. v. OHM Remediation Services Corp. and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency M.D. PA No. 98-0398 Judge says CERCLA preempts state nuisance claims, bars private parties' effort to halt incinerator used in site cleanup 5/5/98 P.9. 3rd Cir. gets appeal of ruling that CERCLA preempts state nuisance claims, bars private suit to halt incinerator in PA10/8/98 P. 9.
CERCLA/ MONITORING Lansford-Coaldale Joint Water Authority v. Tonolli Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-7605 3rd Cir. says sister company's CERCLA liability as 'operator' depends on activity during waste disposal 10/4/93 P 4, opinion P. 12.
CERCLA/ NON-SETTLORS United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 3rd Cir. to hear argument July 26 on whether EPA can require nonsettlor to join clean-up despite settlement 6/22/99 P. 8.
CERCLA/ NON-SETTLORS United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 EPA tells 3rd Circuit that CERCLA authorize orders that require nonsettling parties to undertake joint cleanup7/8/99 P. 7, reply P. 55.
CERCLA/ NON-SETTLORS United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 U.S. asks 3rd Circuit to allow EPA to require nonsettling Occidental Chemical to join cleanup despite settlement 5/25/99 P.12.
CERCLA/ NON-SETTLORS United States of America v.Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 3rd Cir. says EPA is not barred from requiring other parties to conduct cleanup despite a full settlement 1/11/00 P.8, opinion P. 46.
CERCLA/ NON-SETTLORS United States of America v.Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 3rd Cir. says EPA is not barred from requiring other parties to conduct cleanup despite a full settlement 1/11/00 P.8, opinion P. 46.
CERCLA/ OWNER/OPERATOR ARRANGER LIABILITY Vineland Construction Co. v. Universal-Rundle Corp. D NJ No. 92-3115 Judge says Sears' liability as 'owner/operator' and 'arranger' under CERCLA must be decided at trial 3/20/95 P. 5, opinion P. 40.
CERCLA/ PREEMPTION Manor Care Inc. v. Judith Yaskin et al. 3rd Cir U.S.C.A. No. 91-5128 New Jersey tells 3rd Circuit that CERCLA does not preempt use of state law to recover cleanup costs 6/3/91 P. 8, brief P. 33.
CERCLA/ PREMPTION Manor Care Inc. v. Judith Yaskin et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5128 3rd Circuit says CERCLA does not preempt use of state process to recover state's share of costs 12/16/91 P. 5, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA/ PRP David Ehrlich v. Janet Reno 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. 94-2220 3rd Cir. sets argument July 16 in appeal of whether EPA can demand 'every conceivable detail' of private finances 5/23/95 P. 11.3rd Cir. hears argument on whether EPA can demand 'every conceivable detail' of private finances of PRP 7/24/95 P. 14.
CERCLA/ PRP David Ehrlich v. Janet Reno 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. 94-2220 Ehrlich tells 3rd Circuit that EPA violated right to privacy when it required him as PRP to reveal details of finances 3/7/95 P. 5, brief P. 33.
CERCLA/ REAL ESTATE BROKER Robert Lentz and Mary Lentz v. Carl Mason et al. D NJ No. 96-2319 Judge says real estate borker cnanot be operator under CERCLA 5/5/97 P. 7, oinion P. 51.
CERCLA/ RECYCLERS Morton International Inc. v. A. Staley Manufacturing Co. et al. No. 96-3609 (KSH) and Velsicol Chemical Corp. et al. v. A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. et al. No. 96-3510 (KSH) 3rd Circuit agrees with NJ decision that Act 127 applies retroactively to exempt suppliers of waste components 11/27/00 P. 8, opinion P. 19-20.
CERCLA/ RESPONSE COST Schuylkill County Industrial Development Authority v. Tonolli Company of Canada Ltd. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 00-8400 Authority tells 3rd Cir. that $250,000 settlement represents CERCLA response costs, did not flow from 10/24/00 P. 5, brief p. 15.
CERCLA/ RESPONSE COST Schuylkill County Industrial Development Authority v. Tonolli Company of Canada Ltd. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 00-8400 Tonolli Canada says indemnity payment to PRP by secured lender who took no part in cleanup is not response cost 10/24/00 P. 7, brief P. 19.
CERCLA/ RESPONSE COST Schuylkill County Industrial Development Authority v. Tonolli Company of Canada Ltd. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 00-3400 3rd Cir. hears authority argue that $250,000 settlement represented CERCLA response costs, not indemnity 12/28/00 P. 10.
CERCLA/ RESPONSE COST Schuylkill County Industrial Development Authority v. Tonolli Company of Canada Ltd. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 00-8400 Tonolli Canada responds to 3rd Circuit request for material showing Penna. county authority did not manage facility 1/23/01 P. 9.
CERCLA/ RESPONSE COSTS Borough of Princeton v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Mercer, Waste Management of Pennsylvania, Intervenor, Appellate Division of Superior Court, No. A-2343-97T2 Appellate Div. finds countries' agreements over landfill use are invalid but refuses to set them aside immediately 8/18/00 P.4, opinion P. 30.
CERCLA/ RETROACTIVITY Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 Judge says CERCLA applies retroactively to disposal that occurred at Marjol site prior to law's Dec. 1980 enactment 8/6/96 P. 15.
CERCLA/ REVIEW United States of America v. American Color and Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-7589 3rd Cir. allows judicial review of EPA cleanup plan in new case, cites Princeton Gamma-Tech precedent 8/22/94 P. 5, opinion P. 20.
CERCLA/ REVIEW United States of America v. American Color and Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-7589 U.S. seeks rehearing of rulings allowing preliminary injunctions to block ongoing EPA cleanup programs 10/10/94 P. 47, brief P. 28.
CERCLA/ SCRAP METAL Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 Gould asks 3rd Cir. to clarify its SREA decision on scrap metal dealers does not apply to 35 defendants that did not appeal 12/12/00 P. 4, petition P. 11.
CERCLA/ SECTION 107(a)/ HSCA Bethlehem Iron Works Inc. et al. v. Lewis Industries Inc. et al. E.D. PA No. 94-0752 Judge says CERCLA §107(a) allows liable parties, not just 'innocent' parties, to assert cost recovery claims 7/10/95 P. 13, opinion P. 53.
CERCLA/ SECURED CREDITOR – United States of America v. Marvin Pesses et al. W.D. PA –No. 90-0654 Magistrate finds lender is not liable in first case in PA since Congress amended CERCLA secured creditors exemption 5/19/98 P.8.
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 U.S. will appeal ruling that EPA cannot require nonsettlor to pay for cleanup because settlement provided 'relief' 3/16/99 P.11.
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-3084 Occidental says §113 prohibits actions against nonsettlor to enforce order where EPA has obtained 'complete relief' 5/25/99 P.10.
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENT United States of America v. W.R.Grace & Co.-Conn D NJ No. 98-2045 Judge approves Grace's agreement to provide $31.7 million to U.S. for cleanup of Rare Earths site in Wayne Township 4/20/99 P.7, opinion P. 43.
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 EPA and DEP say Waste Management is using pilot study of 'alternative' to delay Keystone Landfill site settlement 11/11/98 P.8, reply P. 25..
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENTS United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. M.D. PA No. 4:CV-98-0686 Judge says U.S. is barred from requiring nonsettlor to pay for cleanup because settlement provided 'complete relief' 11/25/99 P.9, opinion P. 36.
CERCLA/ SETTLEMENTS United States of America v. Occidental Chemical Corp. M.D. PA No. 4:CV-98-0686 Judge says U.S. is barred from requiring nonsettlor to pay for cleanup because settlement provided 'complete relief' 11/25/99 P.9, opinion P. 36.
CERCLA/ SPILL AC The Fishbein Family Partnership v. PPG Industires Inc. and PSE&G D NJ No. 93-653 (WHW) PSE&G's effort to cite UGI's 1899 control over site as basis for claims under CERCLA and Spill Act is denied 1/9/95 P. 4, opinon P. 14.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 3rd Cir. finds insufficient evidence for applying doctrine of alternative liability to CERCLA claim but leaves door open 11/23/99 P. 4, opinion P. 27.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 3rd Cir. finds insufficient evidence for applying doctrine of alternative liability to CERCLA claim but leaves door open 11/23/99 P. 4, opinion P. 27.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT ALTERNATIVE LIABILITY New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 3rd Cir. finds insufficient evidence for applying doctrine of alternative liability to CERCLA claim but leaves door open 11/23/99 P. 4, opinion P. 27.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT INDEMNITY Global Landfill Agreement Group v. 280 Development Corp. et al. D NJ Magistrate allows municipality's indemnity cross-claim against township waste transporter in Global Landfill case 12/6/99 P.5, opinion P. 13.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6309 NJ Turnpike Authority informs 3rd Cir. that rejection of alternative liability for seven sites is appeal issue 10/21/98 P. 4, statement P. 13.
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Industries Inc. et al. D NJ No. 93-2037 NJ Turnpike Authority appeals ruling that AlliedSignal, PPG, Occidental Chemical are not liable for cleanup of sites 9/11/98 P. 10
CERCLA/ SPILL ACT The Fisbein Family Partnership v. PPG Industires Inc. and PSE&G D NJ No. 93-653 (WHW) PSE&G appeals denial of its bid to amend complaint to allege CERCLA and Spill Act claims in Jersey City 1/9/95 P. 4, opinoin P. 14.
CERCLA/ SUCCESSOR LIABILITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 and related case Judge denies reconsideration of ruling that rejected corporate successor liability for cleanup of NJ site 2/5/96 P. 9.
CERCLA/ SUCCESSOR LIABILITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 and related case Judge rejects U.S. and Witco's argument that Elf Atochem is corporate successor to Elko Chemical for cleanup of site 12/18/95 P. 8, opinion P. 52.
CERCLA/ SUCCESSOR LIABILITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 and related case Witco asks court to reconsider ruling that rejected corporate successor liability for cleanup of NJ site 1/22/96 P. 8, brief ). 36.
CERCLA/ THIRD PARTY SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1483 Keystone Landfill third party defendants insist settlement with them is fair, reasonable and faithful to CERCLA policy 10/8/98 P. 12, brief P. 44.
CERCLA/ TRANSPORTER LIABILITY Tippins Inc. and International Mill Construction Inc. v. USX Corp. and Petroclean Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-3599 3rd Circuit says transporter must have considerable input in site selection for liability under CERCLA9/5/94 P. 7, opinion P. 45.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 91-5436 (DRD) osas files appeal from treble damages for not entering consent order. 4/22/97 P. 6.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5153, 97-5238 Cosan does not oppose DEP's intervention in Cosan's appeal of award of treble damages for not joining in consent order 7/7/97 P. 7.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5153, 97-5238 Cosan tells 3rd Cir. that court erred in imposing treble damages for not joining in consent order 8/14/97 P.7, brief P. 41.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5153, 97-5238 NJ, in intervenor's brief, tells 3rd Cir. that court correctly allowed treble damages despite lack of participation Wolfpaw Joint Venture v. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation OAL No. ESA 4362-95 Shinn bars FWPA exemption for golf course based on prior MLUL approval or farming exemption 9/23/97 P.6, brief P. 36.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5153, 97-5238 Shareholders tell 3rd Cir. that lower court properly awarded treble damages against 'recalcitrant' party 9/8/97 P. 6, brief P. 29.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 91-5436 (DRD) New Castle County; Rhone-Poulenc, Inc.; Zeneca Inc. v. Hallburton NUS Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7443 3rd Cir. says PRP may not seek Section 107 cost recovery from other PRPs, but only Section 113 contribution claims 5/21/97 P. 12.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5153, 97-5238 Cosan tells 3rd Cir. that court applied treble damages part of NJ Spill Act to acts incurred before it was invoked 10/21/97 P.9.
CERCLA/ TREBLE DAMAGES POLLUTION EXCLUSION Frederick V. Dexter D NJ No. 91-5436 (DRD) Judge denies reconsideratoin of his $794,204 treble damagesd award but vacates prejuudment interest 3/17/97 P. 5, opinion P. 36.
CERCLA/ U.S. CONTRIBUTION/ INDEMNITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 Judge says lease does not indemnify United States from Elf Atochem's CERCLA contribution claim 11/7/94 P. 11.
CERCLA/ U.S. CONTRIBUTION/ INDEMNITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 Judge denies reconsideration of decision holding lease does not indemnify U.S. from CERCLA contribution 2/6/95 P. 10.
CERCLA/ U.S. LIABILITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 and related case Judge in PA refuses to dismiss claims against U.S. as to CERCLA owner, operator and arranger liability in NJ 3/4/96 P. 6, opinion P. 31.
CERCLA/ U.S. LIABILITY Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 and related case Witco seeks new declaration that U.S. is liable for response costs for arsenic and DDT, rather than lead, at Myers site 9/4/95 P. 10, motion P. 21.
CERCLA/ U.S. LIABILITY/ CONTRIBUTION Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 Judge finds U.S. as owner liable for contribution to Elf Atochem for past, future CERCLA costs 10/10/94 P. 7 opinoin P. 50
CERCLA/ U.S. LIABILITY/ CONTRIBUTION Elf Atochem North America v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-7458 United States argues caselaw supports argument that pre-CERCLA indemnification covers CERCLA liability 10/10/94 P. 9. CERCLA/ ARRANGER Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 Judge affirms that suppliers of junk batteries were 'arrangers' who knew of intent of sale 8/25/98 P. 9, opinion P. 46.
CERCLA/ARRANGER Gould Inc. v A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 Gould insists defendants failed to meet elements required for new CERCLA exemption for sending material to facility 5/9/00 P. 9
CERCLA/ARRANGER Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3cv91-1714 Four defendants say CERCLA change exempts sellers of recyclable batteries from liability; seek retroactive relief 2/24/00 P.8, brief P. 45.
CERCLA/ARRANGER Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3:cv-91-1714 Judge refuses to expedite decision on new CERCLA exemption as to batteries sent to Marjol-Gould facility C ALJ approves Ecology Systems' $13,000 settlement 5/23/00 P. 9.
CERCLA/ARRANGER Gould Inc. v.A & M Battery &Tire Service et al.M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 Recycler defendants tell 3rd Cir. that Gould cannot claim cleanup activity is a judicial action initated by U.S. 7/5/00 P. 11.
CERCLA/ATTORNEYS FEE Fallowfield Development Corp. and E.J. Callaghan & Co. Inc. v. Leonard M. Strunk and Better R. Strunk E.D. PA No. 89-8644 and related case. 6/24/91 P. 12. ;
CERCLA/CONTRIBUTION LITIGATION News America Publications Inc. v. Albert Spitz et al. D NJ No. 89-3450 (JHR) Plaintiffs in Swope CERCLA contribution action submit Navy's agreement to settle for $50,000 6/19/90 P. 8, opinion P. 12;
CERCLA/DE FACTO MERGER Aluminum Company of America v. Beazer East Inc. etc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Noi 96-3420 Beazer East tells 3rd Cir. that court erred in applying 'de facto merger' doctrine to Alcoa's CERCLA claims 6/10/97 P. 9.
CERCLA/PREEMPTION Manor Care Inc. v. Judith Yaskin et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5128 Manor asks 3rd Cir. to order discovery on whether NJ can use ex parte procedures for CERCLA costs 4/22/91 P. 7, brief P. 27;
CERCLA/PREEMPTION Manor Care Inc. v. Judith Yaskin et al. D NJ (CSF) No. 90-783 Judge says CERCLA does not preempt Spill Act; Manor Care appeals ruling in favor of NJDEP 3/4/91 P. 9, opinion P. 68;
CERCLA/PREEMPTIONManor Care Inc. v.Judith Yaskin et al.3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5128 In reply, Manor tells 3rd Cir. that CERCLA preempts NJ Spill Act due to actual conflict 6/24/92 P. 7, brief P. 37.
CERCLA/REVIEW United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 Third Cir. denies United States' rehearing petitions in decisions allowing review of ongoing EPA cleanups 11/7/94 P. 8.
CERCLA/SCRAP METAL Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV-91-1714 3rd Cir.'s amendment allows judgment in favor of Gould against 35 defendants to stand at the district court level 12/28/00 P. 8, order P. 37.
CERCLA/SPILL ACT NJ Turnpike Authority v. PPGD NJ No. 93-2137 Judge finds generator defendants not liable for turnpike sites 6/2/98 P.4, Opinion 12.
CERCLA/SPILL ACT SETTLEMENT Global Landfill Agreement Group v. 280 Development Corp. et al. D NJ No. 96-5338 (NHP) Judge approves stipulation dismissing claims between Global Landfill agreement group and 29 defendants 12/12/00 P. 6, orders P. 23, 27
CERCLA/Spill Act The Fishbein Family Partnership v. PPG Industries Inc.. and PSF&G D NJ No. 93-653 (WHW) Judge finds PPG liable under CERCLA but not Spill Act4/9/96 P. 9, opinion P. 61. CERCLA/SUCCESSOR LIABILITY Atlantic Richfield Co. et al. v. Joseph M. Blosenski Jr. et al E.D. PA No. 92-2059 Judge applies substantial continuity test to CERCLA successor liability, allows veil piercing in PA case 3/21/94 P. 14.Judge allows appeal of ruling that applied substantial continuity test to successor liability 4/4/94 P. 11.
CERCLA/SUPPLIERS Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al.
CERCLA/SUPPLIERS Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery & Tire Service et al. M.D. PA No. 3-CV 91-1714 Judge reluctantly allows more time to determine if retroactive SREA exemptions apply to four defendants 12/12/00 P. 7.
CERCLATri-County Business v. Clow Corp. E.D. PA No. 90-5845 Judge says hazardous substances in material at site were not enough to trigger CERCLA or PA claims 10/19/92 P. 9, opinion P. 37.
CERCLAUnited States of America v. Alcan Aluminum Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5481 3rd Circuit denies United States' petition for rehearing on PRP's right to establishment apportionment of harm 8/24/92 P. 5, briefs 16, 17.
CHAPTER 11 D.K.S. Services Inc. OAL No. EWH 2125-90 ALJ dismisses appeal as sanction after petitioner in bankruptcy fails to name special counsel 1/22/91 P. 13;
CHAPTER 11 In Re White Chemical Co. D NJ Bankruptcy judge gives EPA access to Newark site of White Chemical,which is in Chapter 11 11/6/90 P. 15;
CHAPTER 11 In Re: Torwico Electronics Inc. Torwico Electronics Inc. v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5021 11/8/93 P. 4, opinion P. 13. 3rd Circuit declares debtor liable for cleanup because order is exercise of NJ police power, not Chap. 11 claim 11/8/93 P. 4, opinoin P. 13.
CHAPTER 11 Tennsco Corp. v. Estey Metal Protucts Inc. et al. D NJ No. 96-1284 (GEB) Judge says trustee cannot be liable for site contamination 10/7/96 P. 7, opinion P. 43.
CHAPTER 11/ CERCLA AL Tech Specialty Steel Corp. v. Allegheny International Credit Corp. et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 95-3415 3rd Cir. finds insufficient evidence that environmental liabilities were discounted dollar-for-dollar in purchase2/17/97 P. 9.
CHEMICAL EXPOSURE/ Candy Svelling v. Chemlawn of Cape May Inc.; Chemlawn Services Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1105-94T3 Panel says limitations period began with last lawn treatment, rejects discovery rule in sensitivity case 3/4/96 P. 8, opinion P. 37.
CHOICE OF LAW Armotek Industries Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausaw D NJ No. 88-3220 Judge applies PA law to insurance dispute over pollution control costs between Armotek and Wausau 12/5/89 P.8, opinion P. 48; Judge refuses to allow immediate appeal 1/12/90 P. 8, opinion P. 38;
CHOICE OF LAW Armotek Industries Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-5969 and 90-60013rd Cir. says PA law controls coverage involving NJ company's costs for cleaning up CT site 1/6/92 P. 4, opinion P. 19.
CHOICE OF LAW Eastman Kodak Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-5352-99T2 Appellate Div. applies NY rather than NJ law to Kodak's Insuance policies, citing role of commerce between states 12/12/00 P. 9, opinion P. 15.
CHOICE OF LAW Essex Chemical Corp. et al. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al. D. NJ No. 93-3438 (JCL) Judge reverses magistrate on choice of law, says NJ law applies only to sites in the state under Gilbert Spruance 3/17/97 P. 9.
CHOICE OF LAW Johnson Matthey Inc. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Div. of NJ. Superior Court No. A-5546-89T1 NJ panel says NJ law governs 'sudden and accidental' language for NJ sites, even for out-of-state policies 8/5/91 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
CHOICE OF LAW NL Industries Inc. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. etc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5470 3rd Cir. says court erred in applying NJ rather than NY law to lead paint claims with NJ environmental claims 9/18/95 P. 6, opinion P. 19.
CHOICE OF LAW Pfizer, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau New Jersey Supreme Court No. A-66/67-97 Supreme Court says law of waste site has more dominant relationship in Pfizer's multistate, multisite litigation 6/23/98 P. 6, opinion P. 40.
CHOICE OF LAW/ INSURANCE NL Industries v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5030 3rd Cir. amends NL Industries' ruling but denies motion for reconsideration based on factual error 11/11/98 P.5, order P. 21.
CHOICE OF LAW/ INSURANCE NL Industries v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-5030 Insurers support 3rd Cir. stay of appeals involving choice of law until NJ Supreme Court decides issue 2/2/98 P.8. Third Circuit stays appeals involving choice of law in pollution exclusion until NJ Supreme Court rules 5/5/98 P.7. NL Industries says 3rd Cir. ruling that applies NY law to environmental claims is based on factual error 10/8/98 P. 4, brief P. 14.
CHOICE OF LAW/ POLLUTION EXCLUSION J. Josephson Inc. v. Crum & Forster Insurance Co. et al. N.J. Superior Court of Bergen County No. BER-L-01537-90 NJ judge applies NJ's broader pollution exclusion interpretation to recoverv for NJ, NY and PA cleanups 6/21/93 P. 8, opinion P. 43.
CHROMITE Kearney, IMO Town of and Town of Secaucus Chromite Ore Processing Residue Sites and Occidental Chemical Corp. and Chemical Land Holdings NJDEP Occidental Chemical agrees to $51.5-million cleanup, record $2.5-million fine 5/8/90 P. 4, opinion P. 26;
CHROMIUM CLEANUP IMO Allied-Signal Inc. and Metro Park Site Administrative Consent Order DEPE Allied-Signal signed consent order to clean up chromium in Metro Park field in Jersey City12/7/92 P. 7, order P. 19.
CHROMIUM CLEANUP In the Matter of Hudson County Chromate Chemical Production Waste Sites NJDEP PPG consent decree for $80-million cleanup of 53 sites in Jersey City available from this publication 8/21/90 P. 8;
CHROMIUM CLEANUP In the Matter of the Hudson County Chromate Chemical Production Waste Sites NJDEP PPG agrees to $82.5-million chromium cleanup of 21 industrial as well as 32 residential sites 7/24/90 P. 13;
CHROMIUM ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE Florence Trum v. Allied-Signal Inc. et al. Hudson County Superior Court No. W-W014248-89 Occidental Chemical seeks J.N.O.V. in $1.8-million verdict for environmental exposure to chromium 11/8/93 P. 9.
CHROMIUM EXPOSURE CLASS ACTION Russo et al. v. Allied-Signal Inc. et al. Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Hudson County No.HUD-L-9394-92 Judge certifies chromium exposure class for all who played on Allied-Signal's Metrofield before cleanup 5/23/94 P. 13, opinion P. 42
CHROMIUM EXPOSURE CLASS ACTION Russo et al. v. Allied-Signal Inc. et al. Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Hudson County No.HUD-L-9394-92 Judge approves $700,000 settlement of chromium class for those who played on Jersey City field before cleanup 7/8/96 P. 8.
CHROMIUM SETTLEMENT NJDEP v. Cycle Chem OAL No. EEQ 3726-98 ALJ approves DEP settlement in which Cycle Chem agrees to six-month suspension of chromium testing certification 8/11/98 P.10.
CHROMIUM SUIT Russo et al.v. Allied-Signal Inc.Superior Court of NewJersey, Hudson County 18 plaintiffs sue Allied-Signal over alleged exposure to chromium at Jersey City ball field 11/9/92 P. 13.
CITIZEN SUIT Environmental Defense Fund and Bergen SWAN v. Planning Baord of the Township of Rivervale et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1027-91T5 Panel affirms dismissal of citizen suit opposing development in Hackensack Watershed as premature 3/8/93 P. 12, opinion P. 17.
CITIZEN SUITS Clinton County Commissioners and Arrest the Incinerator Remediation Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7683 3rd Circuit orders en banc hearing on whether CERCLA allows citizen suit prior to completion of remedial action 4/8/97 P. 13.
CITIZEN SUITS Clinton County Commissioners and Arrest the Incinerator Remediation Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7683 3rd Circuit orders en banc hearing on whether CERCLA allows citizen suit prior to completion of remedial action 4/8/97 P. 13.
CITIZEN SUITS Clinton County eetc. v. US EPA 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7583 Overruling Princeton Gamma-Tech, 3rd Circuit in banc holds that citizens' suit must await EPA's remedial action 7/7/97 P. 4, opinion P. 40.
CITIZENS SUIT American Littoral Society and Public Interest Research Group of Pennsylvania v. U.S . Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Citizens' suit alleges EPA fails to identify adequately, improve water quality in NJ rivers, lakes and wetlands 2/5/96 P. 13.
CITIZENS SUIT Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) PIRG settles first citizens' suit in New Jersey against resource recovery facility under Clean Air Act 6/10/97 P. 5.
CITIZENS SUIT/ RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY Public Inteest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) Parties file consent decree in first citizens' suit in NJ against resource recovery facility under Clear Air Act 10/7/97 P.7, decree P. 36, 37.
CITIZENS SUIT/ RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) Hearing held on Warren Energy's motion to dismiss CAA citizen suit against resource recovery facility 10/9/95 P. 14.
CITIZENS SUIT/ RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) Judge allows PIRG to bring first citizen suit against resource recovery facility in NJ under Clean Air Act 1/8/96 P. 4, opinion P. 23.
CITIZENS SUIT/ RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) Judge sets May 2, 1997 discovery deadline in first citizens' lawsuit in New Jersey against resource recovery facility 12/17/96 P. 9.
CITIZENS SUIT/ RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) PIRG brings first citizens' suit against resource recovery facility for violating federal Clean Air Act 7/24/95 P. 7. Warren Energy insists Clean Air Act precludes as matter of law citizen suit against resource recovery facility 7/24/95 P. 8, brief P. 65. Chemical Industry Council of NJ says citizen suits against facilities would deter non-compliers from resolving issues 7/24/95 P. 9. brief P. 57. Waste services association says resource recovery facilities would have to 'needlessly litigate issues' 7/24/95 P. 10.
CIVIL RIGHTS South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Department of Environmental Protection. et al. D NJ Camden Vicinage No. 01cv702(smo) Opposing injunction, St. Lawrence Cement insists no evidence exists DEP acted with discriminatory intent 3/19/01 P. 5, brief P. 20.
CIVIL RIGHTS South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Department of Environmental Protection. et al. D NJ Camden Vicinage No. 01cv702(SMO) Judge finds NJDEP violated civil rights of residents in approving air permits for cement facility in Camden 4/24/01 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
CIVIL RIGHTS South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Department of Environmental Protection. et al. D NJ Camden Vicinage No. 01cv702 Camden group asks court to declare DEP's permits invalid for exposing minority residents to excessive pollution 2/21/1 P.4, complaint P. 17.
CLAIMS AGAINST STATE Last Chance Development Partnership et al v. Thomas H. Kean , Appellate Div., Superior Court Landowners in Last Chance sue state environmental official over 20-month building delay caused by rules 8/7/90 P. 11;
CLAIMS AGAINST STATE Last Chance Development Partnership et al. v. Thomas H. Kean Cape May Superior Court No. CPM L-687-90 Complaint printed in issue of 8/21/90 P. 46;
CLASS ACTION Harding, Paul F. et al. v. Calgon Corp. et al. Appellate Div., Superior Court. Hawthorne residents appeal denial of class action against Merck, Calgon for medical surveillance 9/25/90 P. 10; Appellate Division refuses to review order that rejected class certification 10/23/90 P. 10;
CLASS ACTION OPT OUT The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al. v. United States Gypsum Company et al. D NJ No. 87-4227 (HAA) Prudential court may have been misled by defendant's silence regarding Prince George settlement, Green says. 12/17/96 P. 12.
CLASS ACTION/ DISCLOSURE Joanne Strawn et al. v. John B. Canuso Sr. et al. etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4764-91T3 Appellate Division says builder and broker must tell potential buyers that homes are near closed landfill 3/7/94 P. 4, opinion P. 16.
CLASS ACTION/ OPT OUT Prince George Center Inc. and MBL Life Assurance Corp. etc. v. U.S. Gypsum Co. et al. PA Superior Court No. 531 Phila. 1997 Grace and USG insist that finality of class action judgment would be meaningless if Prudential is not member of class 6/24/97 P. 13.
CLASS ACTION/ OPT OUT Prince George Center Inc. and MBL Life Assurance Corp. etc. v. U.S. Gypsum Co. et al. PA Superior Court No. 531 Phila. 1997 Prudential insists defendants were aware of its intention to pursue $110-million claims in NJ outside class action 6/10/97 P. 13.
CLASS ACTION/JURISDICTION/LOCAL ACTION Kaiser Cement Corp. v. Lakes Asbestos of Quebec Ltd. et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 90-1367 Kaiser asks U.S. Supreme Court to review rulings on subject matter jurisdiction from 3rd Circuit in school class action 3/18/91 P. 14;
CLEAN AIR Duquesne Light Co. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and PA DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-3071 3rd Cir. says Duquesne Light lacks standing as to causation and redressability requirements for review of final rule 2/16/99 P. 11.
CLEAN AIR ACT Commonwealth of PA, Dept. of Environmental Resources v. U.S. EPA 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-3071 3rd Cir. finds EPA rejection of PA's plan to reduce ozone in Phila. area was not arbitrary or capricious 5/20/91 P. 13;
CLEAN AIR ACT Delaware Valley Citizens Council for Clean Air et al. v. Arthur A. Davis et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-1309 & 90-1410 3rd Cir. orders district court to determine whether more measures are required for air quality in Phila. 5/20/91 P. 12;
CLEAN AIR ACT Star Enterprise and Texaco Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6321 3rd Cir. says Clean Air Act does not apply to turbines that are not affected facilities 'in' petroleum refinery 12/28/00 P. 12.
CLEAN AIR ACT Star Enterprise and Texaco Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6321 EPA says proper characterizing of administrative process is important to future emission matters in circuit 2/21/1 P. 8, reply P. 15.
CLEAN AIR ACT Stare Enterprise and Texaco Inc. v. United States Environmental protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6321 EPA asks 3rd Cir. to clarify applicability of Clean Air Act was result of adjucatory process and thus was order, not rule 2/5/1 P. 8, motion P. 14.
CLEAN AIR ACT United States of America v. Anthony Dell'Aquilla, Harry Grant, Sandalwood Construction Corp. Third CIRCUIT U.S.C.A. No. 96-5761 3rd Cir. says NJ party with control over emissions ' not just owner ' can be strictly liable under Clean Air Act 8/11/98 P. 4, opinion P. 43.
CLEAN AIR ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT RESOURCE RECO VERY FA CILITY Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Warren Energy Resource Co. D NJ No. 94-6380 (GEB) Warren Energy Resource says court erred in allowing PIRG suit because PIRG had opportunity to intervene in hearings 1/22/96 P. 4, brief P. 14.
CLEAN AIR Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air v. Carol Browner 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-3377 Citizens' group tells 3rd Cir. that EPA cannot designate ozone area as attainment area without PA requirements 8/14/97 P.13.
CLEAN AIR Star Enterprise and Texaco Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6321 Texaco says heightened judicial deference sought by EPA in applying Clean Air Act would sow confusion 2/21/1 P. 7, response P. 13.
CLEAN STREAMS LAW/ U.S. LIABILITY Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental Resources v. United States Postal Service 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-7073 3rd Cir. rejects U.S. argument of sovereign immunity from penalties for violations of PA Clean Streams Law 1/10/94 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Hercules says U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Steel requires dismissal of Clean Water claims for lack of causal link 2/16/99 P. 4, briefs P. 14, 26.
CLEAN WATER ACT America Littoral Society v. U.S.A. American Littoral Society files notice to sue EPA for failure to compel NJ to comply with Clean Water Act 3/7/95 P. 7, notice P. 56.
CLEAN WATER ACT Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. et al. v. Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 89-3684 3rd Cir. vacates injunction, says district court did not weigh irreparable injury, inadequacy of remedies 7/10/90 P. 11;
CLEAN WATER ACT P.H. Glaffelter Co. v. U.S. EPA 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 90-3648 and 91-3195 3rd Circuit refuses to review Glatfelter appeal of EPA's 'toxic hotspot' view of mill discharge 11/4/91 P. 10.
CLEAN WATER ACT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 PIRG , Friends of the Earth tell 3rd Cir. that $2.6-million maximum penalty is supported by evidence, ability to pay 5/6/96 P.5, motion P. 13.
CLEAN WATER ACT United States of America v. Robert Brace; Robert Brace Farms 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A No. 94-3076 3rd Cir. denies rehearing on decision that effects of wetland discharge do not make activities exempt 1/23/95 P. 12.
CLEAN WATER ACT United States of America v. Robert Brace; Robert Brace Farms 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-3076 3rd Cir. says wetland size and discharge effect do not make farming activities exempt from Clean Water Act 12/5/94 P.4, Opinion P. 5, opinion P. 60.
CLEAN WATER ACT United States of America v. Robert Brace; Robert Brace Farms 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-3076 Brace seeks rehearing of 3rd Cir. decision that wetland size or discharge effect do not make activities exempt 1/9/95 P. 7, petition P. 39.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Magistrate judge allows amended complaint in groups' suit alleging EPA fails to list impaired waters in NJ 9/15/00 P. 6, brief P. 13.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge hears arguments on allegations that EPA failed invalid.7/24/00 P.4.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Environmental groups asks court to compel EPA to promulgate Section 303(d) list of five bodies of water 7/10/01 P. 11, brief P. 62.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Groups seek judgment on cliams that EPA still fails to identify bodies of water 7/10/01 P. 12.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Environmental groups says EPA's lack of action in NJ imperil existence of some of rarest species on Earth The American Littoral Society and the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group 7/10/01 P. 13.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge dismisses two counts similar to others in complaint alleging EPA allowed NJ to delay implementing CWA 1/23/01 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) EPA seeks stay to respond to fifth amended complaint alleging EPA allowed NJ to delay implementing CWA 3/6/1 P. 4, MOTION P. 11.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge finds U.S. EPA allowed NJ to delay implementing CWA by arbitrarily approving deficient water quality lists 1/23/01 P. 4, opinion P. 10.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge grants environmental groups' motion for judgment; orders EPA to promulgate 303(d) list for five bodies of water 9/20/01 P. 8, order P. 43.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. US. EPA D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) In this issue: Text of opinion denying citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to produce records of approvals 1/11/00 P. 10, opinion P. 33.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Magistrate judge allows extenson for two citizens groups to appeal ruling denying motion to compel EPA discovery 1/27/00 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies EPA's motion for reargument of ruling that allows groups to claim EPA's delay of water quality duties 11/23/99 P. 5, order P. 12.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. Unite States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to complete record in suit alleging failure of duty in NJ 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. Unite States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to complete record in suit alleging failure of duty in NJ 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. US. EPA D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) In this issue: Text of opinion denying citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to produce records of approvals 1/11/00 P. 10, opinion P. 33.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Magistrate judge allows extenson for two citizens groups to appeal ruling denying motion to compel EPA discovery 1/27/00 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies EPA's motion for reargument of ruling that allows groups to claim EPA's delay of water quality duties 11/23/99 P. 5, order P. 12.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. Unite States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to complete record in suit alleging failure of duty in NJ 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizens Lobby v. Unite States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Judge denies citizens groups' motion to compel EPA to complete record in suit alleging failure of duty in NJ 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and NJ PIRG v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) American Littoral Society and PIRG oppose stay of time for claims against EPA over implementation of CWA 3/6/1 P. 4, response P. 13, answer P. 14.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizen Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) EPA to provide citizens groups with communications between EPA and DEP on Clean Water Act mandate 1/6/97 P. 5, stipulation 17, 19.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Citizen Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) Magistrate denies protective order on communications between EPA and DEP on Clean Water AZct mandate 12/17/96 P. 5, declaration P. 65.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZENS SUIT American Littoral Society and Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 (MLP) No. 96-cv-0489 In this issue: Text of citizens' suit alleging EPA failed to identify water quality in NJ rivers, lakes, wetlands
CLEAN WATER ACT/ CITIZENS' SUIT American Littoral Society v. Doehler-Jarvis Pottstown Inc. E.D. PA No. 97-0618 Doehler-Jarvis agrees to $1 million settlement and to forfeit permit in largest citizens' suit recovery in PA 4/22/97 P.11, opinion P. 36.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ ECONOMIC BENEFIT United States of America v. Municipal Authority of Union Township, Dean Dairy Products Company Inc. Third Circuit U.S.C.A. No. 97-7115 Third Cir. declares Clean Water Act allows $4-million penalty for wrongful profit from period of violations 7/28/98 P. 4, opinion P. 28.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ NOTICE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge denies interlocutory appeal of ruling that 'deference' must be shown administrative decisions 1/6/97 P. 8.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ NOTICE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge dismisses majority of PIRG's allegations of violation of Clean Water Act against Hercules 8/6/96 P. 5.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ NOTICE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge holds non-jury trial in PIRG suit against Hercules alleging violation of Clean Water Act 3/3/97 P. 10
CLEAN WATER ACT/ NOTICE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge says 'substantial deference' must be shown state administrative decision as to evidence and penalties 11/18/96 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ NOTICE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge says 'substantial deference' must be shown state administrative decision as to evidence and penalties 11/18/96 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ PRE-COMPLAINT VIOLATIONS Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. et al. v. Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc.3rdCir. 3rd Cir. finds no jurisdiction over NPDES permit 9/6/93 P.8, opinion P. 36.
CLEAN WATER ACT/ WETLANDS United States of America v. John Pozsgai et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1454 3rd Cir. affirms ruling that Pozsgais are strictly liable under Clean Water Act for discharging wetlands fill 7/5/93 P. 4, opinionP. 10.
CLEAN WATER ACT/CITIZEN SUIT American Littoral Society and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Citizens Lobby v. United States Environmental Protection Agency D NJ No. 96-339 Two NJ groups file fifth amended complaint agasint EPA. 2/5/1 P. 9, coomplaint P. 28.
CLEAN WATER ACT/DISCHARGE International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, AFL-CIO and Harvard Industries Inc. D NJ No. 86-1833 Judge holds Harvard Industries liable for pollutant release although monitoring is not listed on permit 8/7/90 P. 3, opinion P. 13;
CLEAN WATER ENFORCEMENT ACT Full text of Senate Bill 2188 5/8/90 P. 8, text P. 55;
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 - 3rd Cir. denies Magnesium Elektron's motion for costs against citizens' groups after finding they lack standing 10/21/97 P.6, brief P. 25.
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 Magnesium Electron challenges citizens' groups on reconsideration of 3rd Circuit ruling on standing 9/23/97 P.12.
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 3rd Cir. says citizens' group lacks standing to bring Clean Water case for failure to show members' injury 8/14/97 P. 4, opinion P. 24.
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 Seeking rehearing, PIRG says it had no reason to believe evidence on standing already submitted was inadequate 9/8/97 P. 4, petition P. 13.
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-5049 3rd Cir. denies citizen groups' petition for reconsideration of decision that they lack standing for Clean Water lawsuit 10/7/97 P.8.
CLEAN WATER Public Interest Research Group et al. v. Magnesium Elektron Inc. 3rd Cir. USCA No. 96-5049 Seeking rehearing on coasts. Magnesiuim Elektron insists it was injured by unsuccessful Clean Water Act lawsuit11/12/97 P.8, brief P. 33.
CLEANUP $26-million cleanup of Combe Fill South municipal landfill site gets under way in Morris County 11/9/92 P. 14.
CLEANUP Hubson County Chromate Chemical Production Waste Sites NJDEP PPG Industries directed to pay over $31.5 million to clean up 32 residential lots in Jersey City 6/19/90 P. 7;
CLEANUP L.E.Carpenter and Radiation Technology Superfund Sites 6/20/94 P. 11, opinoin P. 39. L.E. Carpenter site is first formal record of decision under agreement to eliminate EPA-DEPE duplication 6/20/94 P. 12.
CLEANUP New Jersey as $828 million in commitments for cleanup of ECRA sites, NJDEP reports to Congress 11/21/89 P. 15;$22 million in ECRA assurances reported from 11 companies cleanup sites in 10 counties 11/21/89 P. 16;
CLEAN-UP NJDEP issues first multi-site cleanup action directing 450 companies and individuals to clean up four sites 6/5/90 P. 10;
CLEANUP SITES Report DEP reports on progress at over 380 publicly funded Superfund and non-Superfund cleanup sites in state 4/21/98 P.10.
CLEANUP STANDARDS Avon Products Inc. v. NJDEP Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-6023-87T5 Panel orders hearing on PCB cleanup standards for Avon in absence of ECRA criteria 9/11/90 P. 4, opinion P. 16;
CLEANUP STANDARDS DEP completes preliminary work on draft regulations at contaminated sites 6/3/91 P. 13.
CLEANUP/ DILIGENT REMEDIATION Black Horse Lane Associates et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 00-5031 Black Horse Lane insists it was error to find lack of duty to clean up within 'reasonable' time without trial 8/18/00 P. 5, brief P. 12.
CLEANUP/ DILIGENT REMEDIATION Black Horse Lane Associates et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 00-5031 Third Cir. finds no contractual duty was breached by failure of Essex Chemical to complete cleanup under way 14 years 9/29/00 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
CLEANUP/ DILIGENT REMEDIATION Black Horse Lane Associates et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 00-5031 Essex Chemical tells 3rd Cir. that no contractual duty was breached by failure to complete cleanup sooner 7/5/00 P. 9, brief P. 15.) CONSENT ORDER Robert Wooley v. Exxon Co. U.S.A. And Joseph Keown Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5673-98T1 S Appellate Div. says Exxon is not obligated to clean up excess iron under agreement to remove contaminants invalid.7/24/00 P.12, opinoin P. 27.
CLEANUP/ DILIGENT REMEDIATION Black Horse Lane Associates et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 00-5031 Black Horse Lane appeals ruling on failure to find 14 years is 'reasonable' time for seller to finish contractual clean-up 4/25/00 P. 9, brief P. 23.
CLEANUP/ DILIGENT REMEDIATION Black Horse Lane Associates et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 00-5031 Black Horse Lane appeals ruling on failure to show 14 years is 'reasonable' time for seller to finish contractual clean-up 2/24/00 P. 4, opinion P. 13, 18.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 97-1250 (NHP) Judge dismisses Essex Chemical's counterclaim to force owner to assent to declaration of environmental restriction 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5684 3rd Cir. allows withdrawal of appeal of ruling that seller did not breach contract by not cleaning up property in 14 years 11.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5684 3rd Cir. allows withdrawal of appeal of ruling that seller did not breach contract by not cleaning up property in 14 years 11.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 97-1250 (NHP) Essex Chemical says present site owner has no legal basis for opposing Classification Exception Area for groundwater 12/6/99 P. 5, brief P. 22. Black Horse Lane insists there is no basis for requiring plan for groundwater other than cleanup provided in agreement 12/6/99 P. 7, brief P. 31. Essex's reply faults Black Horse Lane for not acknowledging cleanup plans are always subject to amendment by DEP 12/6/99 P. 8, brief P. 41.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 97-1250 (NHP) Judge dismisses Essex Chemical's counterclaim to force owner to assent to declaration of environmental restriction 12/21/99 P. 9.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5684 3rd Cir. allows withdrawal of appeal of ruling that seller did not breach contract by not cleaning up property in 14 years 11.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 97-1250 (NHP) Essex Chemical says present site owner has no legal basis for opposing Classification Exception Area for groundwater 12/6/99 P. 5, brief P. 22. Black Horse Lane insists there is no basis for requiring plan for groundwater other than cleanup provided in agreement 12/6/99 P. 7, brief P. 31. Essex's reply faults Black Horse Lane for not acknowledging cleanup plans are always subject to amendment by DEP 12/6/99 P. 8, brief P. 41.
CLEANUP/ REASONABLE TIME Black Horse Lane Assoc. et al. v. Dow Chemical Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5684 3rd Cir. allows withdrawal of appeal of ruling that seller did not breach contract by not cleaning up property in 14 years 11.
CLEANUPS DEP's scorecard: 90 new cleanup projects totaling $30 million initiated from July to December 1989 7/24/90 P. 13;
CLEANUPS Nine companies agree to post $20 million as guarantee for investigations and cleanups of sites in six counties 4/10/90 P. 13;
CLEAR AIR Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Carol Brown and United States Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 96-3364 3rd Cir. affirms EPA finding that Pittsburgh area was not attaining national ambient air quality standards for ozone 8/5/97 P. 8.
CLEAR WATER ACT New Hanover Township, Paradise Watchdogs, Beverly Ream v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 3rd Circuit U.S. C.A. No. 92-1589 3rd Cir. finds objections to Corps' permit for landfill is not ripe 7/19/93 P. 10, opinion P. 40.
CLOSURE ACT IMO Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:1I Township of Voohrees v. DEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4098-93T2 Appellate Div. reverses denial of Voorhees's claims, says intent of Closure Act is not to deny funds to such 'owner' 6/11/96 P. 4, opinion P. 38.
CLOSURE ACT Johnson Machinery Co. Inc. v. Manville Sales Corp. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3647-89T1F "Sanitary landfill facility' in Closure Act requires that sole source landfill must be disclosed panel says 5/20/91 P. 7, opinion P. 55;
CLOSURE ACT/ LIABILITY NJ DEPE v . Gloucester Environmental Management Services Inc. D NJ No. 84-0152 (SSB) Judge says persons owning less than majority interest in GEMS landfill can be held liable under Closure Act 9/21/92 P. 7, opinion P. 11.
COASTAL WETLANDS Francis Cisek v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 4734-97 DEP reached proper result in finding application does not meet conditions for Coastal Wetlands permit, Shinn holds 2/16/99 P. 8.
COASTAL AREA Robert L. Walter and Lynn P. Walter v. Department of Environmental Protection, Land Use Regulations OAL No. ESA 605-97 DEP commissioner finds permits for residences in area with dune and vegetation barred by coastal zone rules 2/17/98 P.11, opinion P. 28.
COASTAL AREA Robert L. Walter and Lynne P. Walter v. Department of Environmental Protection, Land Use Regulations OAL No. ESA 605-97 ALJ says permits for residences in area containing dune and vegetation is barred by coastal zone rules 9/8/97 P. 12a.
COASTAL OIL AND GAS Union Oil Co. of California v. Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Agency Decision Union Oil files 3rd Circuit challenge to Clean Water Act coastal gas and oil extraction guidelines for Alaska 3/17/97 P. 12.
COASTAL RESOURCES Distributec Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Division of Coastal Resources etc. NJ Supreme Court No. A-90-94 NJ Supreme Court affirms DEPE's rejection of proposed cargo vessel port on Delaware based on Port Use Rule 4/10/95 P. 9, decisin P. 59.
COASTAL RESOURCES Distributec Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Division of Coastal Resources Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-451-92T2 Appellate Div. affirms DEPE's rejection of proposed cargo vessel port on Delaware based on Port Use Rule 5/23/94 P. 9, opinoin P. 23.
COASTAL REVIEW ACT In the Matter of Cape May County Utilities Authority Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-4867-88T1 Appellate Division affirms DEP's ability to impose CAFRA conditions on all coastal developments 7/24/90 P. 10, opinion P. 48;
COASTAL ZONE Joseph W. Fahey v. Department of Environmental Protection OAL No. ESA 3818-94 ALJ denies exemption for docks, moorings in shellfish area to petitioner who also asked that rule be amended 4/10/95 P. 11, decision P. 51.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT In Re CAFRA Permit No. 87-0959-5 Issue to Gateway Associates Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3868-93-T5 Appellate Div. allows memoranda of DEP officials on CAFRA waiver for Gateway multi-use project 11/7/94 P. 5, brief P. 47.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Long Island Power Authority et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5613 3rd Cir. affirms dismissal of NJ's claims against PECO, NRC, Coast Guard over radioactive shipment to PA 8/22/94 P. 9.
COLLECTION National Waste Recycling Inc. et al. v. Middlesex County Improvemet al. NJ Supreme Court No. A-104-96 NJ Supreme Court says curbside collection for eventual recycling is not exempt from public bidding requirement 7/21/97 P. 7, opinion P. 38.
COMMENTARY Christopher J. Daggett: Why DEP will not appeal opinion on rules implementing Freshwater Wetlands Act 11/7/89 P. 17;
COMMENTARY Weiner, Scott comments on merger of DEP and BPU: 'A New Era of Environmental Protection for New Jersey 5/20/91 P. 71;
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-2936 and 00-2949 3rd Circuit says building owners have standing to allege Commerce Clause protects against waste generation fees 11/7/01 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Cargille's Tab-Pro Corp. v. Hanover Sewerage Authority D NJ No. 97-4953 (JCL) Judge says Atlantic Coast bars using 'financial disasater' to justify regulation that waste water go to specific plant 12/8/97 P.8, opinion P. 44.
COMMERCE CLAUSE George W. Harrison et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County E.D. PA No. 99-1418 Bank that financed county trash-to-steam plant says it is not liable for private haulers' loss from flow control changes 3/21/00 P. 10.
COMMERCE CLAUSE In Re: Long-Term Out-of-State Waste Disposal Agreement Between County of Hunterdon and Glendon Energy Co. of Glendon, PA NJ Superior Court, Appellate Division No. A-1126-88T1 Panel bars long-term contract for Hunterdon to dispose of waste at PA facility without back-up 2/20/90 P. 4, opinion P. 15;
COMMERCE CLAUSE Old Bridge Chemicals Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5789 3rd Circuit says NJ's hazardous waste regulations for by-products do not biolate Commerce Clause 6/15/92 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Old Bridge Chemicals Inc. v. NJDEP D NJ No. 90-2546 (MTB) NJDEP seeks summary judgment in suit challenging 'solid waste' definition stricter than federal rules 2/18/91 P. 7, memorandum of law P. 45;
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-2936 and 00-2949 Authority tells 3rd Circuit that 75 building owners lack standing for Commerce Clause challenge of waste fees 5/7/01 P. 6, brief P. 35.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-2936 and 00-2949 75 building owners tell 3rd Cir. that Commerce Clause bars 'local barriers' such as county waste generation fees 5/22/01 P. 6, brief P. 27.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County. Nos. 00-2936 and 00-2949 75 building owners raise issue for first time before 3rd Circuit of individual waste generators' Commerce Clause challenge 4/10/01 P. 4, brief P. 14.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County. E.D. PA No. 99-3026 Judge finds apartment owners lack standing to challenge waste fee system adopted in PA county in wake of Carbone 11/23/99 P.8, opinion P. 23.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County. E.D. PA No. 99-3026 Judge finds apartment owners lack standing to challenge waste fee system adopted in PA county in wake of Carbone 11/23/99 P.8, opinion P. 23.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Oxford Associates et al. v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County. E.D. PA No. 99-3026 Judge finds apartment owners lack standing to challenge waste fee system adopted in PA county in wake of Carbone 11/23/99 P.8, opinion P. 23.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Pennsylvania Waste Haulers Association v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County E.D. PA No. 99-1782 County waste authority in Pennsylvania says waste haulers lack sufficient damage to sustain Commerce Clause claim 5/9/00 P.12a.
COMMERCE CLAUSE Swin Resources Systems Inc. v. Lycoming County, PA et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 89-1001 PA company asks U.S. Supreme Court to rule that states cannot "hoard" landfill for preferred use of residents 2/20/90 P. 11, petition P. 50; Supreme Court refuses to review case 3/20/90 P. 14;
COMMERCE CLAUSE The Pennsylvania Waste Haulers Association v. Waste System Authority of Eastern Montgomery County E.D. PA No. 99-1782 Judge allows waste haulers' claim that plan devised to avoid Commerce Clause challenge interferes with their contracts 3/21/00 P. 8.
COMMERCE CLAUSE/ ACT 101 Harvey & Harvey Inc. v. Chester County, DER Chester County Solid Waste Authority et al. E.D. PA No. 94-3170 Judge says Carbone is not a 'wholesale, coast-to-coast invalidation' of flow control laws such as Chester County's 10/10/94 P. 43.
COMMERCE CLAUSE/ FLOW CONTROL Harvey & Harvey Inc. v. Chester County and Chester County Solid Waste Authority E.D. PA No. 94-3615 Judge approves stipulation after finding PA county flow control does not descriminate per se; applies Pike 9/5/94 P. 11, order P. 63.
COMMERCE CLAUSE/ Kephart Trucking Co. v. PA Dept. of Environment Resources PA Environmental Hearing Board NO. 92-537-MJ PA ALJ finds irreparable harm if trucking company hauling waste from NJ is not allowed to operate facility 3/22/93 P. 11.
COMMUNITY RIGHT TO KNOW Annual Community Right to Know Report lists companies releasing 10 largest quantities in air, water, sites 10/23/90 P. 50;
COMPEL Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. Star Enterprise et al. D NJ No. 89-5370 (CSF) Magistrate compels Texaco to answer interrogatorie of PIRG relating to Texaco directors and capitalizat 11/18/91 P. 6, opinion P. 16.
CONDEMNATION State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection v. Clement Wilson Fairweather Jr. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4016-95T2 Appellate Div. reverses $34,000 condemnation award; judge should have allow testimony on historical value 3/17/97 P. 11.
CONDOMINIUM GARBAGE COLLECTION Harmon Cove I Condom inium Assn. et al. v. Mayor and Council of the Town of Secaucus Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2535-91T3Appellate Div. orders new inquiry into whether Secaucus must collect garbage for condominium 2/22/93 P.10.
CONFIDENTIALITY/ CITIZENS SUITS Pennsylvania Environmental Enforcement Project Inc. v. Keystone Cement Co. D DE 96-588 Judge unseals documents that allegedly show competitor was source of funding for citizens' suit against Keystone 8/5/97 P. 12.
CONFIDENTIALITY/SETTLEMENT United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. NJDEP v. Almo Anti-Pollution Services Corp. et al. D NJ No. 89-4340(JFG) and 89-4380 (JFG) Magistrate approves maximum confidentiality order as defendants move toward Kramer claims settlement 9/21/91 P. 8.
CONFLICIT OF INTEREST CLAIM Frank Lanziano v. Peter Cocoziello et al. App Div No. A-7219-95T3 App. Div. says lower court erred in dismissing conflict of interest claim involving has station lawsuit 11/12/97 P. 12
CONFLICT-OF INTEREST--Rohm and Haas v.-American Cyanamid-Co. et al.-D NJ-No. 99-1191---Judge finds two and a half year delay in alleging conflict-of interest in environmental suit supports finding of waiver 12/11/01 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
CONNECTION FEES/ MORATORIUM Georgefield Associates Inc.v. Township of Bordentown and Bordentown Sewerage Authority Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3608-92T5 Appellate Div. limits recovery of fees in escrow for developer who built sewer plant during moratorium 11/21/94 P. 8, opinion P. 14.
CONSENT DECREE Ciba-Geigy Ciga-Geigy agrees to $60-million groundwater recharge plan; one of largest single settlements 11/8/93 P. 23.
CONSENT DECREE Global Landfill 29 companies sign consent decree to undertake $30 million remedial work at Global Landfill site. 9/6/93 P.12.
CONSENT DECREE PIRG V. Star Enterprise et al. D NJ No. 89-5370 Texaco and Star agree to settle PIRG's lawsuit over alleged violations of NJPDES limitations 7/20/92 P. 7, decree P. 62.
CONSENT DECREE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. Exxon Co. of U.S.A. D NJ No. 89-2284 (HLS) Exxon agrees to spend $2.8-million for environmental projects in agreement with PIRG and Friends of Earth 8/7/90, opinion P. 38;
CONSENT DECREE Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. v. Elf Atochem North America Inc. D NJ No. 89-3946 Elf Atochem and PIRG agree to $1,017,500 settlement for alleged violations at Pennwalt plant in Thorofare 5/8/95 P. 8, decree P. 35.
CONSENT DECREE Rohm & Haas, and 3M sign consent order to pay for $3 million cleanup of two Pinelands sites 2/6/90 P. 11;
CONSENT DECREE United States of America et al. v. Carborundum Co. et al. D NJ No. 94-1484 (WHB) Nine companies agree to pay $3.8-million for past and future cleanup in Fairfield site and do $32M in work 4/18/94 P. 0.
CONSENT DECREE United States of America v. Advanced Environmental Technologies Corp. et al. D NJ No. 90-3792 Consent decree fro cleanup of Chemical Control site expected to cost $8 million plus past and future costs 11/6/90 P. 14;
CONSENT DECREE United States of America v. Armstrong World Industries Inc. et al. D NJ No. 89-4363 21 compani es whose material was transshipped without their knowledge settle for $3.7 million 3/9/92 P. 7, consent decree P. 13.
CONSENT DECREE United States v. Occidental Chemical Corp. D NJ No. 89-5064 Occidental, Chemical Land agree to $10-million cleanup of Diamond Alkali Superfund Site in Newark 2/20/90 P. 12;
CONSENT DECREE/ CAPS United States et al. v. Rohm & Haas Co. et al. D NJ No. 90-11-3-86 De minimis settlors express concern over settlement with major parties that caps liability at $88 million 3/8/93 P. 4, letter P. 14.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case Settling Work Defendants ask for application of UCFA to all settlement agreements in Kramer Landfill case 11/11/98 P. 4, brief P. 11.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case Citing lack of access to settlement data, Sun opposes settling work defendants' motion on settlement effects 12/8/99 P. 4, brief P. 17.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case For now, Settling Work Defendants withdraw motion to determine effect of settlement on non-settlers in Kramer 12/8/99 P. 4, brief P. 17.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case Settling Work Defendants ask for application of UCFA to all settlement agreements in Kramer Landfill case 12/8/99 P. 5, certification P. 12, 37
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case Citing lack of access to settlement data, Sun opposes settling work defendants' motion on settlement effects 12/8/99 P. 4, brief P. 17.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case For now, Settling Work Defendants withdraw motion to determine effect of settlement on non-settlers in Kramer 12/8/99 P. 4, brief P. 17.
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case Settling Work Defendants ask for application of UCFA to all settlement agreements in Kramer Landfill case 12/8/99 P. 5, certification P. 12, 37
CONSENT DECREE/ CERCLA United States of America v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and related case After eight years, consent decree totaling $95 million with 250 parties is approved in Kramer Landfill case 9/22/98 P.7, opinion P. 29.
CONSENT DECREE/ FUTURE OVERSIGHT United States of America v. Atlas Minerals and Chemicals Inc. et al. E.D. PA No. 91-5118 Judge says consent decree does not guarantee PRPs contribution protection from all future oversight costs 3/7/94 P. 14.
CONSENT DECREE/ JURISDICTION American Littoral Society v. Brown Prining East Inc. E.D. PA No. 90-5297 Judge declares consent decree between PA compan~ and PA group does not bar suit by NJ citizen group 2/17/92 P. 8.
CONSENT ORDER Allied Corp. v. James V. Frola Jr. et al. D NJ No. 87-462 (AMW) Judge approves consent order dismissing Von Dohln and Frola claims against AlliedSignal for $200,000 8/21/95 P. 12, order P. 45.
CONSENT ORDER IMO Exxon Company, U.S.A. Exxon agrees to $1 million in penalties and DEPE allows higher levels at start-ups, shut downs 4/19/93 P. 9.
CONSENT ORDER In the Matter of Allied Signal Inc. NJDEP Allied-Signal agrees to $3.5-million letter of credit to ensure cleanup of headquarters in Morris Township 12/19/89 P. 17;
CONSENT ORDER In the Matter of the Town of Kearny and the Town of Secaucus Chromite Ore Processing Residue Sites and Occidental Chemical Corp. and Chemical Land Holdings Inc. NJDEP Occidental Chemical agrees to $51.5-million cleanup of 26 chromium waste sites, record $2.5-million fine 5/8/90 P. 4, consent order P. 26;
CONSENT ORDER Standard Chlorene Chemical Corp., In Matter of, NJDEP Standard Chlorene Chemical agrees to $3.5-million cleanup in Kearny 12/19/89 P. 17;
CONSENT ORDER United States of America, State of New York, State of New Jersey et al. v. Exxon Corp. E.D. NY Exxon agrees to pay $15 million to settle damages from pipeline spill in Arthur Kill 4/8/91 P. 9;
CONSENT ORDER/ AIR POLLUTION NJDEP, Division of Environmental Quality v. Nearpara Rubber Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No A-0256-90T5 Appellate Division says adminstrative consent order does not give 'license to pollute' in future 1/6/92 P. 6, opinion P. 55.
CONSENT ORDERS PSE&G signs consent orders for cleanup at seven coal gasification plants; $1.7 million posted for tests 4/10/90 P. 17;
CONSENT ORDERUnited States of America and N.J. DEP v. Rohm and Haas Co. et al. D NJ No. 85-4386 Judge allows Rohm and Hass to deposit $6 million under a consent order in the Lipari landfill case 10/5/92 P. 11.
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES Mark Bitar et al. v. M.R.W. Inc. et al. Superior Court Appellate Division No. A-6802-96T1 Appellate Div. says court erred in not allowing trial of consequential damages from underground tanks 7/19/99 P. 10, opinion P. 42.
CONSPIRACY In Re: Asbestos School Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-1494 3rd Circuit finds no basis for civil conspiracy against Pfizer from association in asbestos school class action 1/9/95 P. 11.
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS Manning- ton Mills Inc. v. Robert C. Shinn Jr. et al. D NJ No. 94-736 (JEI) Judge says DEP officials' 'errors' in priority listing for site remediation cause no deprivation of constitutional rights 3/20/95 P. 5, opinion P. 21.
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF REGU- LATIONS Avalon Golf & Redevelopment Corp. v. DEPE, Division of Coastal Resources OAL ESA No. 6750-92 ALJ says Pinelands regulations are unconstitutionally vague, recommends approval of CAFRA application 4/5/93 P. 9.
CONSULTANTS Grand Street Artists et al. v. General Electric Co. et al. D NJ No. 96-3774 Judge limits his comment that owner who closes operations and later sells property 'must comply with ECRA twice' 4/12/00 P.4, opinion P. 16
CONTAMINATED SOIL RECYCLING In Re Application No. 92-0020-01 (Submitted by the Walter R. Earle Corp. to the Pinelands Commission Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-071-93T5 Panel affirms land-use control over contaminated soil recycling but rejects conditno of 50 percent local soil 4/4/94 P. 5, opinion P. 14.
CONTAMINATION/ TAXES In Re: Custom Distribution Services Inc. City of Perth Amboy v. Custom Distribution Services Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5082 3rd Cir. bars tax offset for owner of Superfund site because of failure to seek relief prior to filing bankruptcy petition 8/28/00 P. 4, opinion P. 28.
CONTEMPT Waste Conversion v. Rollins Environmental Services (NJ) Inc. et al. U.S.C.A. 3rd Cir. No. 89-1184 3rd Cir. upholds contempt citation against attorneys who advised Rollins employee not to appeal 11/7/89 P. 12;
CONTEMPT/ FOIA Robert W. Grine et al .v. William R. Coombs et al. 3rd Cir. USCA No. 98-3494 3rd Cir. denies appeal of dismissal of claims involing EPA's alleged failure to respond to nearby 'contamination' 1/20/99 P. 5.
CONTINGENCY FUND IMO Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:1 1 Township of Voohrees v. DEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4098-93T2 NJ Supreme Court says Voorhees can seek damages from Contingency Fund because it did not take part in closure 5/21/97 P. 11.
CONTINUOUS TRIGGER Colonial Foods Inc. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al. Monmouth County Superior Court Law Division No. Mon-L-0392-93 Judge says 'continuous trigger' left no basis for Aetna's denial of coverage to Colonial Foods for Lone Pine costs 5/8/95 P. 9.
CONTINUOUS TRIGGER Colonial Foods Inc. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. AM-1002-94-TS3 Colonial Foods says Aetna uses 'historical revisionism' in arguing Lone Pine damage occurred prior to policies 6/6/95 P. 8.
CONTRACT INDEMNIFICATION State of New York et al. v. SCA Services Inc. et al. S.D. NY No. 83 Civ 6402 (RPP) Judge decides contract indemnification issue in favor of waste transporter in New York case 9/20/93 P. 11.
CONTRACT/ WASTE National Waste Recycling Inc. and John Grywalski v. The Middlesex County Improvement Authority and Waste Management of North Jersey Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6428-94T2 Appellate Div. finds citizen has standing to challenge negotiated waste contract but bidding is not required 5/6/96 P.7, opinion P. 60.
CONTRACT/SOLID WASTE Hudson Jersey Sanitation Co. Inc. v. City of Bayonne et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4803-89T2 Bayonne need not renegotiate garbage collection contract due to increased tipping fees, panel says 5/6/91 P. 9;
CONTRIBUTION Allied Corp. v. James V. Frola et al. D NJ No. 87-462 Judge ponders reconsideration of contribution claim against BASF, Exxon in $5-million consent order 12/5/89 P. 12, notice of motion P. 32, Frola counsel's letter P. 35;
CONTRIBUTION Allied Corp. v. James V. Frola et al. v. Basf Wyandotte Corp. et al. D NJ No. 87-462 Judge says Allied is protected from contribution claims because of consent order with U.S. over Edgewater site 9/20/93 P. 6, opinionP. 41.
CONTRIBUTION CERCLA/SPILL ACT/ Lenox Inc. et al. v Reuben Smith Rubbish Removal D NJ No. 97-5065 (JEI) Judge finds motion premature to dismiss Lenox's effort to recover $1.5 million in past oversight costs at landfill 4/25/00 P. 10, opinion P. 54.
CONTRIBUTION Elf Atochem North America Inc. v. United States of America et al. E.D. PA No. 92-CV-7458 Judge rejects Elf Atochem's contribution claim against Witco because consent decree does not bar EPA suit 9/20/93 P. 9.
CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION United States of America and Commonwealth of PA v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. et al v. Penn Central Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-1479 3rd Cir. affirms contribution protection for settling parties; Congress meant to reward settlement, punish non settlers 12/28/00 P.5, opinion P. 30.
CONTRIBUTION Transtech Industries Inc. et a. v. A & Z Septic Clean et al.D NJ No. 90-2578 Judge says 200 defendants that settled with U.S. for $4.9M cannot escape $100M contribution claims 8/24/92 P. 4, opinion P. 50.
CONTRIBUTION Transtech Industries Inc. et al. v. A & Z Septic Clean et al. D NJ No. 90-2578 Appeal filed from decision that defendants who settle with U.S. over NJ site cannot escape $100M in claims 12/7/92 P. 4, brief P. 12 and 14.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Alcan Aluminum Inc. et al. E.D. PA No. 88-4970 U.S. opposes PA site trustees' intervention in consent decree over contribution and convenant not to sue 11/9/92 P. 10.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Judge reports accord after trial on Stepan Chemical's liability to Joint Defense Group at two CERCLA sites 5/9/00 P. 8.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Non-jury trial continues on liability of Stepan Chemical to Joint Defense Group; 3rd Circuit appeal is pending 1/27/00 P. 8.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Stepan Chemical will ask 3rd Cir. to review contribution ruling. 11/23/99 P. 7.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Non-jury trial continues on liability of Stepan Chemical to Joint Defense Group; 3rd Circuit appeal is pending 1/27/00 P. 8.
CONTRIBUTION United States of America v. Jerome Lightman et al. D NJ No. 92-4710 (JBS) Stepan Chemical will ask 3rd Cir. to review contribution ruling. 11/23/99 P. 7.
CONTRIBUTION United States v. Helen Kramer et al. D NJ No. 89-4340 and New Jersey v. Alamo Anti-Pollution Services Corp. et al. D NJ No. 89-4380 Judge severs contribution claims against Kramer generator defendants; discovery stayed for some 8/5/91 P. 5, opinion P. 22.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Mayco Oil & Chemical Co., AT&T Technologies Inc. et al. v. Transtech Industries et al., U.S. Supreme Court No. 93-960 U.S. High Court is expected to consider 3rd Cir. ruling that settlement is no bar to contribution at conference 3/21/94 P. 11 Supreme Court declines to review 3rd Cir. opinion that settlement does not protect from contribution claims 6/20/94 P. 7.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Mayco Oil & Chemical Co., AT&T Technologies Inc., et al. v. Transtech Industries Inc. et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 93-960 AT&T and others tell Supreme Court that 3rd Cir. erred in finding lack of contribution protection in settlement 2/7/94 P. 4, Briefs 12, 29.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Transtech Industries Inc. et a. v. A & Z Septic Clean et al v. Charles Trapp et al. D NJ No. 90-2578 Judge allows certain counterclaims alleging fraudulent conveyance of Kin-Buc assets to stand, dismisses others
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Transtech Industries Inc. et al. v. A&Z Septic Clean et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-5636 3rd Cir. finds lack of jurisdiction over issue of whether CERCLA settlement with U.S. bars contribution claims 9/20/93 P. 5, opinion P. 27.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Transtech Industries Inc. et al. v. A&Z Septic Clean et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 93-960 Defendants asks Supreme Court to review 3rd Circuit ruling on CERCLA settlement contribution claims bar 1/10/94 P. 10.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA Transtech Industries Inc.etal.v.A&Z Septic Clean et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92 5636 U.S. tells 3rd Cir. that settlement with U.S. does not release settlors from third-party contribution claims 2/6/93 P. 4, brief P. 13. Transtech says settlement does not protect settlors from third-party contribution claims for remediation 2/6/93 P. 6, brief P. 13. Tranctech says settlement doe snot protect settlors from third-party contribution claims fro remediation
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 3rd Cir. denies rehearing on ruling that vacated $12-milion award on CERCLA contribution claim 8/21/95 P. 10.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 3rd Cir. vacates $12-million award to Hatco on CERCLA contribution claim, orders hearing on sale contract issues 7/10/95 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 Hatco petitions 3rd Cir. to rehear ruling that vacated $12-million award on CERCLA contribution claim 7/24/95 P. 6, brief P. 14.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ Hatco Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1031 Judge finds Grace has no right under CERCLA to jury trial on contribution claim against Hatco 8/22/94 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ TORT SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) Judge refuses to find SC Holdings' contribution claims time-barred under CERCLA and New Jersey Spill Act 7/7/97 P. 9, opinion P. 16
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ TORT SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) Magistrate orders ADR process in litigation over remediation costs at landfill in Burlington County 4/8/97 P. 8, opinoin P. 31.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ TORT SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) Magistrate orders ADR process in litigation over remediation costs at landfill in Burlington County 4/8/97 P. 8, opinoin P. 31.
CONTRIBUTION/ CERCLA/ TORT SC Holdings Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty et al. D NJ No. 95-0947 (GEB) Judge says contract entitles Campbell Soup to indemnity and defense by Waste Management of PA subsidiaries 12/23/97 P.6, order P. 48.
CONTRIBUTION/CERCLA Transtech Industries Inc. et al.v. A & Z SepticClean et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A.No. 92 5636 29 companies tell 3rd Cir. that Kin-Buc settlement with Government bars future contribution claims 1/25/93 P. 7.
CONVENIENS/ COMITY Witco Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2011-94T5 Panel reverses dismissal of Witco's NJ insurance action, saying court must determine if claims, parties are same
CORPORATE VEIL Tempesta and Sons Co. Inc. and Richard Tempesta Inc. t/a Arrow Recycling v. Division of Solid Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection OAL No. ESW 10702-94 ALJ refuses to allow DEP to pierce corporate veil just because same principals control companies 10/12/95 P. 10.
CORPORATE VEIL United States v. Arnold M. Livingston D NJ No. 94-3801 (WGB) Magistrate allows claims for reverse piercing of coroporate veil . 4/8/97 P. 7, opinoin P. 35
CORPORATE VEIL United States v. Arnold M. Livingston D NJ No. 94-3801 (WGB) Magistrate allows claims for reverse piercing of coroporate veil . 4/8/97 P. 7, opinoin P. 35
COSTS AWARD In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-1692 et al. 3rd Cir. says indigency of losing party should be considered in costs award; two of 19 plaintiffs are not liable 8/28/00 P. 7.
COUNSEL FEES A & B Dump Truck Service Inc. as alleged successor to A & B Drum Co. Inc. v. Pennsylvania National Insurance Companies Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4445-91T3 Appellate Division says insurer shouldnot pay entire defense 5/24/93 P. 5, opinion P. 23.
COUNTERCLAIMS Leksi v. Federal Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 88-4123 (SSB) Magistrate refuses to allow insurers' counterclaims for declaratory relief concerning 3 Leksi sites in PA 6/19/90 P. 8, opinion P. 16; Magistrate orders three insurers to pay $3,000 to Leksi for costs in connection with sanctions motion 6/19/90 P. 10, opinion P. 23;
COUNTY PLAN Waste Disposal Inc. v. Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders Superior CourV Monmouth County No. L-52889-90 Elimination of landfill from Monmouth county plan is invalid because of lack of evidence, judge declares 2/3/92 P. 9, opinion P. 37.
COVERAGE Tig Insurance Co. v. Meco Constructors Inc. E.D. PA No. 97-3162 Judge says failure to find policy leaves third-party defendant in NJ landfill lawsuit without coverage 2/8/00 P. 10
COVERAGE/ GEMS Insurance Company of North America v. Anthony Amadei Sand & Gravel Inc. et al. Supreme Court of New Jersey No. 46,725 Supreme Court says environmental coverage action over GEMS future remediation costs does not require jury trial 1/11/00 P. 4, opinion P. 18.
COVERAGE/ GEMS Insurance Company of North America v. Anthony Amadei Sand & Gravel Inc. et al. Supreme Court of New Jersey No. 46,725 Supreme Court says environmental coverage action over GEMS future remediation costs does not require jury trial 1/11/00 P. 4, opinion P. 18.
COVERAGEMetex Corp. v. Federal Insurance Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6689-94T5 Appellate Div. says voluntary cleanup costs may be covered 4/9/96 P. 8, opinion P. 36. COVER-UP ALLEGATIONS Bowman Vulcar A. Jr. v. Mobil Oil Corp. D NJ No. 87-4093 (HAA) Jury awards $1.3 million against Mobil for firing manager who refused action to violation Clean Air Act 12/11/90 P. 8, verdict sheet P. 28;
CRIMINAL CHARGES/ PRO SE State of New Jersey v. Richard Bassi et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2345-9OT3 Hub Recycling defendant may represent himself in criminal case, appeals court says 10/7/91 P. 12.
CRIMINAL VERDICT State of New Jersey v. Larry Angelo Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6653-91T2 Appellate Div. affirms verdict against chief operator of sewage plant for release, abandonment of sludge 7/5/94 P. 14, opinoin P. 46.
CUSTOMER LIST NJDEP V. D & J Marangi et al. OAL NO. ESW 9655-95 Marangi agrees to reduction of penalty to $3,500 for failure to file solid waste customer list on time 5/21/96 P. 13.
DAM INSPECTION IMO Canterbury Development Corp.Appellate Division ofSuperior CourtNo. A-1278-91T5No hearing is required to enforce mandatory dam inspection by Canterbury, Appellate Division says 7/6/92 P. 8, opinion P. 29.
DAM PERMIT Deal Lake Commission v. DEP, OAL No. ESA 4160-93 ALJ says Deal Lake commission fails to show Meyer Dam satisfies 'current serviceability' threshold for state permit 2/3/97 P. 57.
DAM SAFETY ACT Department of Environmental Protection v. County of Cumberland, City of Bridgeton et al. OAL No. ESA 7414-93 and consolidated case ALJ orders Bridgeton to show cause why it should not be required to control East Lake at a safe low level 1/21/97 P. 9, decision P. 51.
DAMAGE/ ACTUAL AND PUNITIVE Allied Corp. v. James V. Frola Jr. et al. D. NJ No. 87-462 (AMW) Judge enters judgment by default for $1 million and $2 million in punitive damages to Frola, Von Dohln 6/6/95 P. 5, order P. 11.
DE MICROMIS SETTLEMENTS United States of America v. Keystone Sanitation Company Inc. et al. M.D. PA No. 93-1482 Judge finds Keystone Landfill de micromis settlements subset of de minimis settlements provided in CERCLA 5/6/96 P.9.
DE MINIMIS SETTLEMENT OFFER IMO Tonolli Corp. Superfund Site Nesquehon- ing, PA EPA Docket No.111-92-35-DC EPA asks 453 de minimis PRPs in PA to pay volume share of $30 million before issuing record of decision 6/15/92 P. 11.
DE MINIMIS SETTLEMENT Transtech Industries Inc. etal. v. A&Z Septic Clean et al. D NJ No. 90-2578 Judge approves Kin-Buc de minimis settlement with 160 parties reached without U.S. gov't involvement 11/23/92 P. 7.
DE MINIMIS United States of America et al. v. Rohm & Haas Co. et al. D NJ No. 85-438886 Judge refuses to certify Lipari de minimis order as final judgment for immediate appeal 6/5/90 P. 9; Contribution claims against 10 de minimis settlors dismissed since $94 million reopened threshold was not incurred 10/9/90 P. 4, opinion P. 13; U.S. Magistrate allows Manor Care to depose EPA but bars discovery on preliminary de minimis decree data 7/10/90 P. 4, opinion P. 14;
DEBARMENT IMO Alleged Violations of Law By Valley Road Sewerage Co. etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5946-94T1 Appellate Div. says debarment from operation of public utility is not excessive penalty absent criminal conviction 11/18/96 P.11.
DEBARMENT IMO Alleged Violations of Law By Valley Road Sewerage Co. etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5946-94T1 Appellate Div. says debarment from operation of public utility is not excessive penalty absent criminal conviction 11/18/96 P.11.
DEBARRING In the Matter of the Allegations of Law and Administrative Code by A. Fiore & Sons Inc. etc. OAL No. ESW 5736-89 Acting DEPE comissioner permanently bars Fiore from collecting solid waste, imposes $1.37-million penalty 1/24/94 P. 8, decision P. 37.
DEBRIS DISPOSAL Bergen County Department of Health Services v. BJF Sanitation Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-003368-94T3 Appellate Div. affirms judgment on seven complaints of debris disposal and reverses judgment as to two 12/4/95 P. 1, opinion P. 36.
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS Sumitomo Machinery Corp. of America Inc. v. AlliedSignal Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-5138 3rd Circuit says ambiguity in cleanup agreement between Sumitomo and AlliedSignal requires hearing on intention 4/22/96 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
DEED RESTIRCT/ DUNES Walter Blejwas v. NJDEP/LURP OAL No. ESA 6689-97 ALJ says DEP does not have authority to require owner of dune property to deed restrict 8-by-110-foot section 6/2/98 P.8, decision P. 40. Reversing ALJ, Shinn finds section of site of single dwelling in Avalon is part of dune under CAFRA 9/22/98 P.9, decision P. 26.
DEFERENCE TO STATE AGENCY DECISIONS Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. and Friends of the Earth v. Hercules Inc. D NJ No. 89-2291 (JBS) Judge's clarification of ruling that federal court must show deference to state agency decision calls for determination 1/21/97 P. 4, order P. 13.
DENSITY IMO New Jersey Pinelands Commission's Certification of Shamong Township's 1997 Master Plan etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2107-97T5 Appellate Div. affirms township's limit of housing density in Pinelands despite lack of hearing transcript 9/29/00 P. 9.
DEP DISCRETION Robert William Moss v. Robert C. Shinn et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A5601-99T3 Appellate Div. affirms DEP's discretion in applying State park restrictions, denies request for mandamus 6/5/01 P.12.
DEP OVERSIGHT/SPILL ACT E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Co. and The General Electric Co. v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy Appellate Division of Superior Court No.-5349-92T5 Appellate Division affirms DEP oversight costs, but says objectors may refuse to pay costs and can raise defense 8/7/95 P. 5 opinion P. 12.
DEPE assesses more than $416,000 in penalties against six companies for alleged air pollution 8/19/91 P. 11.
DEPE Gov. signs executive order clarifying operations of DEPE and Board of Regulatory Commissioners 8/19/91 P. 10.
DEPE PROCEDURES DEPE will publish on Nov. 4 proposed technic changes to expand and streamline appeal process 10/27/91 P. 10.
DEPOSITION In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1183 3rd Cir. affirms dismissal of claims by three plaintiffs for failure to appear in Paoli Railroad Yard Litigation 10/19/92 P. 7.
DER OFFICIALS Richard Winn et al. v. Wayne L. Lynn 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-1033 3rd Cir. finds DER official and attorney enjoy qualified immunity for naming individuals 8/19/91 P. 8.
DEVELOPMENT/ PINELANDS Hovsons Inc. and Homeland Corp. v. Bruce Babbitt D NJ No. 00-3943 (MLC) In reply, groups say case is designed to weaken or eliminate federal and state legal framework for protecting Pinelands 5/7/01 P. 9, brief P. 51.
DEVELOPMENT/CAFRA Hovsons Inc. and Homeland Corp. v. Bruce Babbitt et al. D NJ No. 00-3943 (MLC) Developer opposes groups' intervention in suit alleging federal and state efforts to impede development of land 5/7/01 P. 7.
DIOXIN Ironbound Health Rights Commission et al v. Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4703-89T3F Panel says Diamond Shamrock did not actively mislead workers about dioxin exposure 3/4/91 P. 7, opinion P. 59;
DISABILITY Parrish, Richard v. Vineland Chemical Co. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-3454-88T3 Former chemical operator did not prove partial disability 10/9/90 P. 11;
DISCHARGE American Metals Recovery Corp. v. NJDEP OAL No. EWR 10255-99 Shinn finds that DEP properly denied American Metal's application to increase discharge to Passaic Valley system DEP 9/10/01 P. 8,
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT Florence Land Recountouring Co. Inc. v. NJDEPE, Office of Environment Policy OAL No. EWR 4960-92 ALJ reduces penalty from $50,000 to $5700 for failure to file landfill monitoring report 4/5/93 P. 12.
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS Department of Environmental Protection v. East Coast Ice Co. OAL No. EWR 515-93 ALJ affirms $80,000 penalty for failure to monitor discharge. 3/20/95 P. 9.
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEPE v. Circuit Foil USA Inc. ND NJ No. 89-5371 (AET) Hearing scheduled July 6 on Circuit Foil's motion for reconsideration of temperature exceedances 6/21/93 P.11.
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEPE v. Circuit Foil USA Inc. ND NJ No. 89-5371 (AET) Opinion that frequest reports can establish liability is printed 6/7/93 P. 8, opinionP. 45.
DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. et al. v. Circuit Foil U.S.A. Inc. D NJ No. 89-5371 (AET) Magistrate bars Circuit Foil from interviewing two former employees of intervenor DEPE 5/24/93 P. 5, order P. 19.
DISCHARGES State of New Jersey v. Standard Tank Cleaning Corp. et al. Superior Court, Hudson County judge fines Standard Tank Cleaning principals $5,232,825 for discharges 6/21/93 P.11.
DISCLOSURE ACT Eileen Nobrega et al v. Edison Glen Associates et al. New Jersey Supreme Court Supreme Court says Disclosure Act precludes purchasers from suing under Consumer Fraud over nearby toxic sites 6/5/01 P. 5, answer P. 14.
DISCLOSURE ACT Eileen Nobrega et al. v. Edison Glen Associates et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-6711-97T2 In this issue: Panel's opinion that Disclosure Act retains Consumer Fraud right of real estate buyers 2/24/00 P. 10, opinion P. 37.
DISCLOSURE ACT Eileen Nobrega et al. V. Edison Glen Associates et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-6711-97T2 Appellate Div. says Disclosure Act retains right of real estate purchasers under Consumer Fraud Act to be told about sites 1/27/00 P. 12.
DISCLOSURE ACT Eileen Nobrega et al. v. Edison Glen Associates et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-6711-97T2 In this issue: Panel's opinion that Disclosure Act retains Consumer Fraud right of real estate buyers 2/24/00 P. 10, opinoin P. 37.
DISCLOSURE Betty Simon et al. v. Deptford Township et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5879-91T3 Appellate Division sees no fraud, cites lack of evidence officials knew permit was issued to previous owners 3/21/94 P. 4, opinon P. 52.
DISCLOSURE Carlton Cove Associates v. Mary A. LaGreca etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4706-92T5 Appellate Div. finds indemnity clause unenforceable with 'unsuspecting' buyer of underground tanks 6/6/94 P. 11m opinoin P. 42.
DISCLOSURE OF LANDFILL Joanne Strawn et al. v. John B. Canuso Sr. et al. New Jersey Supreme Court No. A-56/57 NJ Supreme Court denies Realtors' request for clarification as to whether Strawn applies to representing re-sellers of residences 10/9/95 P. 5, order P. 46. - Supreme Court finds builders and real estate brokers are liable to home buyers for nondisclosure of landfill 5/8/95 P. 5, opinion P. 47.Realtors asks N.J. Supreme Court if Strawn applies to re-selling of residences and commercial property 5/23/95 P. 4, letter P. 50.
DISCLOSURE Philip Vespia et al. v. Mary Kissel et al. Superior Court, Middlesex County No. L-11258-91 Jude says fraud claim does not cover seller of contaminated site 1/20/98 P. 10, opinion P. 63.
DISCOVERY Allied-Signal Inc. and UOP Inc. v. Abbille-Paix Reassurances, Aetna Casualty & Suretly Co. et al. Morris County Superior Court No. MRS-L-226-88 Insurers of Allied-Signal are ordered to produce extensive certification of policy terms 11/21/89 P./ 11, discovery order P. 53;
DISCOVERY AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 88-4267 (HLS) Insurers, others get access to grand jury transcripts in investigation of Scientific Chemical Processors 9.25/90 P. 13;
DISCOVERY AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Transtech Industries Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 88-4267 (HLS) Judge allows Carlstadt site parties to inspect all documents subpoenaed in 1979 grand jury case 5/8/90 P. 9; Riker Danzig allowed to represent two companies under Chinese wall provision 5/8/90 P. 11;
DISCOVERY Biddle Sawyer Corp. v. American Cyanamid Co. et al. D. NJ No. 93-1063 (AET) Magistrate approves order governing ex parte contacts with present, past employees of parties 12/19/94 P. 6, opinoin P. 38.
DISCOVERY Chemical Leaman Tank Lines v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1543(SSB) Chemical Leaman is ordered to produce Bridgeport terminal history documents on Aetna's motion 3/20/90 P. 9, order for Chemical Leaman P. 24, order for Aetna P. 26;
DISCOVERY Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. D NJ No. 93-1402 (DRD) Judge denies EPA and Army Corps protective order for documents about dumping of dredge material 2/7/94 P. 7, 41.
DISCOVERY CPC International Inc. and Brodson Properties Inc. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. et al. Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division: Bergen County No. L-37236-89 Judge orders production of environmental audits, says public need outweighs 'self-critical analysis' privilege 3/22/93 P. 7, opinion P. 44.
DISCOVERY Nestle Foods Corp. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1701 (CSF) Judge says Aetna cannot challenge Nestle's designatic of privileged documents in Lone Pine coverage action 9/21/92 P. 10A, opinoin P. 30,33.
DISCOVERY New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Oil Transfer Co. OAL No. EHW 947-95 ALJ
DISCOVERY Public Interest Research Group Inc. et al. v. Star Enterprise et al. D NJ No. 89-5379 (CSF) PIRG allowed discovery into whether Texaco has any control of facility after transferring ownership 8/21/90 P. 7, opinion P. 43;
DISCOVERY SANCTIONS Timofai Sanitation Co., Inc. Discovery Dispute Appella1e Division ot Superior Court No. A-753-9OT5 Appellate Div. remands sanctions action against law firm for discovery in waste disposal case 1/6/92 P. 11.
DISCOVERY The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al. v. United States Gypsum Co. et al. D. NJ No. 87-4227 and related case. Magistrate grants Grace's motion to compel discovery and take deposition in Prudential's lawsuit over 18 buildings 4/22/96 P. 10, order P. 42.
DISCOVERY United States v. Rohm & Haas D NJ No. 85-4386(G) Judge compels records indexes from Manor defendants, with redactions of attorneys' impressions 8/5/91 P. 7.
DISCOVERY/ DEPOSITIONS United States v. Rohm and Haas Co. et al. D NJ No 85-4386 (G) Magistrate bars deposition of U.S. representative on Lipari shipments, says written questions sufficient 5/6/91 P. 7, opinion P. 40;
DISCOVERY/ LANDFILL Estate of Rudoph Caivano et al. v. Montgomery Township Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-235-97T3 Appellate Division rejects discovery rule for landfill site owner's claim the township negligently operated landfill 11/25/99 P.7, opinion P. 31.
DISCOVERY/ LANDFILL Estate of Rudoph Caivano et al. v. Montgomery Township Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-235-97T3 Appellate Division rejects discovery rule for landfill site owner's claim the township negligently operated landfill 11/25/99 P.7, opinion P. 31.
DISCOVERY/INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS United States of America v. Rohm and Haas Co. et a. D NJ No. 85-4386 (JFG) Magistrate allows Rohm & Haas to obtain waste data underlying Owens-Illinois' privileged report in Lipari 8/7/90 P. 6,opinion P. 35; Magistrate sets procedure for Owens-Illinois to sample 10 documents at Rohm and Haas facility 9.25.90 P. 8, opinion P. 22; Magistrate grants Rohm and Haas sanctions, calls Owens-Illinois' counter motion 'harassment tactic' 9/25/90, opinion P. 27;
DISCOVERY/PCBs Amland Properties Corp. v. Aluminum Co. of America v. Tri Terminal Corp. et al. D NJ No. 86-1830 (MTB) Magistrate orders Monsanto to provide ALCOA data on PCBs sold to ALCOA in Edgewater 7/10/90 P. 8 7/10/90 P. 8, opinion P. 49, letter P. 50;
DISCOVERY/STAY Transamerica Insurance Co. v. Thomas M. Durkin & Sons Inc. et al. E.D. PA No. 90-0968 Judge refuses to stay Transamerica's interrogatories regarding Durkin insurance policies affecting GEMS 11/23/90 P. 10;
DISCOVERYUnited States ofAmerica v. PrincetonGamma Tech Inc.D NJNo. 91-809(CSF)Magistrate allows Princeton Gamma Tech to enter third party defendant J&R's property for sampling 8/24/92 P. 6, order P. 14.
DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif et al. E.D. PA No. 96-CV-3960 PADEP says residents cannot show that permitting process for waste facility violated Civil Rights Act 3/9/98 P. 9.
DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif, as Secretary of PA Department of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 97-1125 3rd Cir. says Chester residents may sue PADEP under 'discriminatory effect' provision of Civil Rights Act 1/5/98 P.8.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 St. Lawrence Cement tells 3rd Cir. that citizens group did not show existence of any less discriminatory alteratives 10/10/01 P. 4, brief P. 14.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 NJDEP tells 3rd Cir. that court exceeded authority in finding federal 'right' enforceable under §1983 7/26/01 P. 4, brief P. 18. Third Circuit denies reconsideration of panel's stay of injunction barring operation of cement plant 7/26/01 P. 7.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 01-2224 and 01-2296 South Camden Citizens in Action argues that environmental discrimination effects are enforceable under Civil Rights Act 7/26/01 P. 6, brief P. 46.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 Camden group tells 3rd Cir. that NJDEP's handling of air permit would 'eviscerate' EPA's disparate impact regulation 8/8/01 P. 4, brief P. 39.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 In reply, NJDEP tells 3rd Cir. that EPA regulations never imposed obligations for evaluating disparate impacts 9/20/01 P. 4, reply P. 18.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 Judge tells 3rd Cir. panel he intended injunction against cement plant to survive any NJDEP analysis until hearing 9/20/01 P. 5, reply P. 16.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 3rd Cir. agrees with NJDEP that civil right lawyers already had opportunity to make arguments in previous brief 9/26/01 P. 5.
DISPARATE IMPACT South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ DEP 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 01-2224 Camden group says compliance with EPA regulations does not mean public health is not harmed by cement plant 9/26/01 P. 4, brief P. 3.
DISQUALIFICATION Essex Chemical Corp. and Essex Speciality Products Inc. v. Hartford Accident and Indmenity Company et al. D NJ Mo. 93-3438 (JCL) Magistrate says joint defense agreement places all defense counsel in a conflict of interest with plaintiff 6/10/97 P. 6, opinion P. 38.
DIVISIBILITY OF HARM United States of America v. Fidelcor Business Credit Corp. et al. E.D. PA No. 93-0233 Judge says Alcan does not mandate finding that each drum is separate, distinct harm to establish liability 8/2/93 P. 13.
DIVISIBILITY United States of America and NJDEP v. Rohm and Haas D NJ No. 85-4386 Judge dismisses Owens-Illinois's claims against US, NJ but finds issue of fact regarding divisiblity at Lipari site. 10/21/96 P. 8. Judge says New Jersey cannot be owner or operatoo of site simply by removal actions. 10/21/96 P. 9.
DIVISIBILITY United States of America v. Spaulding Composites Company Inc. D NJ No. 94-5451 (WGB) In this issue: Text of opinion that Spaulding should have opportunity to develop record to support divisibility 2/17/97 P. 12.
DIVISIBILITY United States of America v. Spaulding Composites Company Inc. D NJ No. 94-5451 (WGB) Judge says Spaulding should have opportunity to develop record to support divisibility of Caldwell Trucking harm 2/3/97 P. 5.
DMR Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. et al. v. NJDEPE v. Circuit Foil USA Inc. D NJ No. 89-5371 (AET) Judge says frequent DMR/lab reports can establish liabiity for discharge violations by Yates Industries 5/10/93 P. 6.
DOCK/ SHELLFISH Gerald Mangel v. NJDEPE/LUR OAL No. ESA 589-94 ALJ finds dock in Margate would violate policy on maintenance of shellfish beds
DOCK/ SHELLFISH Gerald Mangel v. NJDEPE/LUR OAL No. ESA 589-94 Text of ALJ decision that dock in Margate would violate policy on shellfish bed maintenance printed in this issue 2/6/95 P. 9. opinoin P. 47.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY State of New Jeresey v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6479-89T3F Appellate Div. reverses denial of Ciba-Geigy's dismissal based on double jeopardy indictment 1/20/92 P. 6, opinion P. 17.
DRAINAGE IMO Route 29, Delaware Avenue Drainage Trunkline Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2331-99T1 Appellate Div. finds Lambertville group fails to assert particular right to hearing on drainage plan for district 4/24/01 P. 9.
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. D NJ No. 93-2402 . Environmental groups file notice for 3rd Cir. appeal of decision that allows dumping bay dredge in ocean 8/22/94 P. 11.
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. 94-5489 Environmental groups tell 3rd Cir. that EPA failed to establish that Newark Bay dredge met permit critera 1/23/95 P. 46.
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5489 . Environmental groups tell 3rd Circuit that permit for disposing of Newark Bay dredge in ocean is unlawful 11/21/94 P. 4, brief P. 16.
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5489 3rd Cir. says EPA, Corps misinterpreted ocean dumping regulations but that need for dredging outweighs error
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. D.NJ No. 93-2402 Judge says dredging permits issued Engineers with EPA consent violated Marine Protection Act 12/18/95 P. 7, transcript P. 49.
DREDGING MATERIAL Clean Ocean Action et al. v. Colonel Thomas A. York et al. D NJ No. 93-2402 Judge declares EPA, Army Corps were within discretion in issuing permit to dump Newark Bay dredge in ocean 7/18/94 P. 8.
DREDGING PERMIT Charles Hoeh t/a Draper Tugs and Barges v. DEP, Division of Coastal Resources OAL No. 2130-92 ALJ orders minimal $100 penalty for dredging lagoon within 25 feet of setback after voluntary corrections 3/7/95 P. 13.
DREDGING PERMIT Great Lakes Dredge and Docks Co. v. DEP et al. Appellate Division No. A-3652-93T2 Panel orders hearing on oppositonto issuance of sand dredging permits. 10/21/96 P. 13.
DREDGING/BID IMO Bid of Agate Construction Co. Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. SA-5758-99T5 Appellate Division affirms DEP's finding that low bid for dredging was 'unreasonable,' despite bidder's 'error' 11/27/00 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
DRINKING WATER NJDEP/Water Enforcement and Compliance v. Borough of Ringwood OAL No. EWR 1301-00 ALJ approves Ringwood's $9,000 settlement with DEP over failure to act on alleged drinking water violations 8/28/00 P. 9.
DRINKING WATER W.R. Grace & Co. v. United States 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5662 3rd Cir. sets argument on Grace's claim that EPA lacks authority to issue emergency water cleanup order 8/18/00 P. 11.
DRINKING WATER W.R. Grace & Co. v. United States 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5662 EPA insists Third Circuit lacks subject matter jurisdiction over EPA's acceptance of Grace's interim statement of work radius 11/7/00 P. 12.
DRINKING WATER W.R. Grace & Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 99-5662 3rd Cir. cautions EPA not to assume word 'endangerment' will be sufficient to sustain order without any support 9/20/01 P.13.
DUE PROCESS Bil-Jim Construction Co. Inc. v. Ocean County Solid Waste Advisory Council and Ocean County Board of Chosen Freeholders Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4595-94T3 Appellate Division rejects due process claim for delay in waste facility start-up because DEP ultimately approved 5/6/96 P.11.
DUE PROCESS State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Division of Environmental Quality v. AA Quality Construction Materials Inc. OAL No. EEQ 11844-93 ALJ dismisses appeal, says due process hearing was forfeited by failure to appear at peremptory hearing 1/9/95 P. 10.
DUMPING RIGHTS Manella Sanitation Inc. v. Bridewater Township and Raritan Valley Disposal Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4364-9OT2F Appellate Div. says Bridgewater improperly withhel disposal contract because of 'dumping rights' question 10.21.91 P. 7.
DUTY TO DEFEND napco INC. V. FIREMAN"S FUND INSURANCE CO. ET AL. W.D. PA NO. 90-0993 Magistrate in PA faults NJ ruling and allows CGL coverage for trespass and nuisance claims 6/3/91 P. 10.
DUTY TO DEFEND The Trustees of Princeton University v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4617-95T2 Appellate Div. says insurer has no duty to defend claims against Princeton despite agreement to waive challenge 8/19/96 P. 5, opinion P. 36.
DUTY TO DEFEND The Trustees of Princeton University v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al. N.J. Supreme Court No. 42,996 . Supreme Court sets argument on insurers' duty to defend Princeton if university agreed not to challenge its defense 8/5/97 P. 5.
DUTY TO MONITOR Division of Water Resources, Dept. of Environmental Protection v. Southern Ocean Landfill Inc. OAL No. EWR 9224-89 ALJ order Southern Ocean Landfill to comply with permit requirement for off-site monitoring wells 3/18/91 P. 12, opinion P. 38;
DUTY TOMONITOR Division of Water Resources, Dept. of Environmental Protection v. Southern Ocean Landfill Inc. OAL No. EWR 9224-89 ALJ denies reconsideration of order for landfill to monitor ^off-site wells for health and safety 6/24/92 P. 10, opinion P. 52.
EARLY REDUCTION CREDITS Carney's Point Generating Plant v. NJDEP/Air Quality Permitting etc. OAL No. EWR 8142-99 ALJ affirms DEP's denial of coal-fired plants' requests for NOx credits, says they were 'properly calculated' 11/27/00 P. 11, decision P. 44.
EARLY REDUCTION CREDITS Carney's Point Generating Plant v. NJDEP/Air Quality Permitting etc. OAL No. EWR 8142-99 Shinn holds amendment for early reduction credits is retroactive1/23/01 P. 9, decision P. 12.
EARLY REDUCTION CREDITS Carney's Point Generating Plant v. NJDEP/Air Quality Permitting etc. OAL No. EWR 8142-99 Shinn holds amendment for early reduction credits is retroactive1/23/01 P. 9, decision P. 12.
EASEMENT FOR CLEANUP State of New Jersey,Department ofEnvironmental Protection v. BriarLake Devleopment Corp.3rd Cir. U.S.C.A.No. 91-57153rd Circuit affirms ruling that easements through subdivision for access to GEMS site had no value 3/23/92 P. 10.
ECA Joseph and Marie Sheridan v. Environmental Claims Administration, DEP OAL No. ECA 100837-95 ALJ says appraiser's evaluation one year after sale is inadequate to support eligibility for ECA claim 3/3/97 P. 8, decision P. 34.
ECRA / BANKRUPTCY Zagata Fabricators Inc, In Matter of v. Superior Air Products U.S.C.A. 3rd Cir. 3rd Cir. says tenant who had contract of sale must pay rent to landlord who failed to comply with ECRA 1/23/90 P.5,opinion P. 16;
ECRA / FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT Triad Associates v. Lummus Crest Inc. and Combustion Engineering et al. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-175-89T2 Panel dins Triad did not prove Lummus contaminated or concealed condition of property 10/23/90 P. 8, opinion P. 31; transcript of hearing on new trial P. 32;
ECRA / NEGATIVE DECLARATION Chemos Corp. v. NJDEP Appellate Division, Superior Court No. A-5543-88-T5 Appellate court approved DEP rescinding of ECRA closure plan for Chemos site; DEP claims a mistake 2/6/90 P. 7, opinion P. 40;
ECRA / OFF SITE In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJ DEP NJ Supreme Court No. 33,765 DEP asks Supreme Court to stay entire ECRA off-site ruling, not just as to cleanups in force on May 6 8/19/91 P. 5, brief . 54; stay P. 54.DEP tells NJ Supreme Court that legislature did not decline to grant authority to pursue off-site pollution 8/19/91 P. 5.
ECRA BANKRUPTCY State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. North American Products Acquisition Corp. et al. D NJ No. 91-4602 (CSF) Reversing bankruptcy court, judge requires hearing on peril to public from abandonment of property 2/17/92 P. 5, opinion P. 36.
ECRA Contract Packaging Corp. v. Tokrill Realty Corp. et a. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1744-95T5 Appellate Div. finds failure to exercise option to purchase less contaminated of two properies blocks ECRA costs 3/3/97 P. 7, opinion P. 26.
ECRA DEP assessed $2.3 million ECRA penalty against Jersey City agency and former owner 12/11/90 P. 11; $650,000 assessed against Acme Press on sampling 12/11/90 P. 11; $247 assessed against J & E Fabricators 12/11/90 P. 11;
ECRA DEP declares three contaminated sites are clean, two other sites' cleanups proceeding under ECRA 8/19/91 P. 12.
ECRA Feighner et al. v. Anton Sauter et al. Appellate Division ot Superior Court No. A-0914-91T1 Appellate Division says sales contract triggers ECRA responsiblities and that seller cannot rescind contract 11/23/92 P. 6, opinion P. 50.
ECRA G & S Investors Frelinghuysen Avenue Inc. v. Aristocrat Leather Products Inc., Evans Rule Company Inc. k/a Evans-Aristocrat Industries Inc. et al. and third-party action Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2316-91T1F Appellate Division rules ECRA applies to business where underground tanks supply fuel for heating 6/1/92 P. 4, opinion P. 10.
ECRA I/M/O/ Cadgene Family Partnership Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6016-93T2 Appellate Div. affirms reopening of ECRA compliance, rescinding of approval due to withholding information 10/12/95 P. 5, opinion P. 14.
ECRA In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEP NJ Supreme Court 33,765 NJDEPE opposes supplemental brief by Ashland and Cooper after argument on ECRA off-site cleanup 2/17/92 P. 10.
ECRA In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2403-87T1 and consolidated cases Panel bars ECRA application off-site; faults partnership and safety closure as triggers 5/20/91 P. 4, opinion P. 15;
ECRA In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEP NJ Supreme Court No. 33,765 ECRA In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEP NJ Supreme Court No. 33765 DEP tells Supreme Court that narrow interpretion of off-site cleanups blocks ECRA's legislative intent 7/22/91 P. 5, petition P. 13. NJ Supreme Court wil l hear DEP appeal of ECRA off-site ruling and review 'establishment' definition 9/21/91 P. 5. orders P. 21,22. Chemical companies tell NJ Supreme Court that DEP lacks ' implied authority' for off-site cleanups 8/5/91 P. 6, brief P. 29. NJ Supreme Court rejects DEP motion for complete stay of ECRA off-site ruling 9/21/91 P. 6, order P. 21.
ECRA In Re Adoption ofN.J.A.C. 7:26B;Public InterestResearch Group of New Jersey et al. v.NJ DEPNJ Supreme Court No. 33,765 DEP asks NJ Supreme Court for 30-day extension to file petition in ECRA off-site cleanup appeal 6/24/92 P. 6, letter P. 34.
ECRA In re Adoption ofN.J.A.C. 7:26BNJ Supreme CourtNo. A-84/85 Sept. Term1 99 1 NJ Supreme Court finds ECRA supports cleanup by property owners of waste that spreads off-site 7/20/92 P. 4, Opinon P. 14.
ECRA In Re Applicability of ECRA to GAF Building Materials Corp. Facilitles Located In Gloucester City Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-411-89T1 Appellate Div. says ECRA was triggered by GAF's cessation of warehousing for more than two years 1/20/92 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
ECRA In Re Campbell Foundry Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1214-9OT2 Appellate Division satys ECRA does not apply to unused site across stree from establishment's operation 12/1/91 P.5, opinion P. 13
ECRA Liquid Air Corp. and Lai Properties Inc. v. Ideal Gas Products Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2340-92T5 Appellate Div. reverses dismissal of property buyer's claims that seller failed to disclose pollution of soil 6/6/94 P. 6, opinion P. 34.
ECRA PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION Dixon Venture v. Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. NJ. Supreme Court No. A-25-90 NJ Supreme Court declares buyer can seek to recover cleanup costs fro ECRA compliance without rescission 2/3/91 P. 4, opinion P. 16;
ECRA S. 1070 Senate committee hears terstimony on ECRA changes to make it easier to reuse old industrial sites. 2/22/93 P.10. (List of documents available from this publication P. 36.)
ECRA Senate Bill 2103 NJ Senate committee reports favorably on bill which provides that foreclosure triggers ECRA for owner 6/3/91 P. 12.
ECRA STANDARDS Farley-Northwest Industries Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2037-89T2 Appellate Div. vacates ECRA cleanup levels, cites DEP's failure to promulgate standards 6/24/92 P. 4,opinion P. 14.
ECRA State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Heldor Industries Inc. 3rd Cir U.S.C.A. DEPE asks 3rd Cir. to vacate opinion that ECRA obligations are dischargeable as ordinary debts 9/7/92 P. 5, Briefs, 18, 39.
ECRA State of New JerseyDEPE v.Heldor Industries Inc.3rd Cir.No. 92-5283 3rd Circuit sets argument Jan. 8 on DEPE challenge to opinion that ECRA obligations are ordinary debts 10/19/92 P. 10.
ECRA The Cadgene Family Partnership v. McLean Boulevard Associates et al. Superior Court Chancery Div. Equity Part No. F-4548-91 Judge awards $1.3 million in case in which DEP vacated its approval of Negative Declaration, Non-Applicab Of evidence to test 'nonhazardous' nature of contaminated soil 1/5/98 P.7, ruling P. 22.
ECRA Willow River Partnership v. WW Engineering & Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5574-93T5 Appellate Div. says landlord failed to show damage from reliance on allegedly negligent ECRA report 6/6/95 P. 4, opinion P. 40.
ECRA/ CONSULTANTS Grand Street Artists et al. V. General Electric Co. et al. D NJ No. 96-3774 Judge finds environmental consultant who assists owner with ECRA cease operations can owe duty to later buyer 9/11/98 P.7, opinion P. 44. Judge allows stipulated dismissal of person who controlled Quality Tool & Die at time operations were discontinued 10/21/98 P. 9.
ECRA/ INSURANCE Crest-Foam Corp. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Superior Court Law Division: Bergen County No. BER-L-1068-93 No reconsideration or appeal sought from ruling that ECRA remediation costs are legal obligation of insurer3 3/4/96 P. 13, opinion P. 52.
ECRA/ SETTLEMENT Amnod Industrries Inc. and Berger 74th Street Corp. v. Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3065-95T3 Panel says lack of record of agreement over ECRA costs requires reversal of order to compel settlement. 4/8/97 P. 11, opinon P. 37.
ECRA/ SETTLEMENT Amnod Industrries Inc. and Berger 74th Street Corp. v. Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3065-95T3 Panel says lack of record of agreement over ECRA costs requires reversal of order to compel settlement. 4/8/97 P. 11, opinon P. 37.
ECRA/ SPILL ACT Dixon Venture v. The Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 7063-95T3 Appellate Division affirms apportionment of $1,943,824 in cleanup costs under ECRA and Spill Act to Dixon Venture 7/7/97 P. 5, opinion P. 50.
ECRA/ SPILL ACT Dixon Venture v. The Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. Superior Court Hudson County No. L-058299-86Judge apportions $1,943,824 in cleanup costs under ECRA and Spill Act to Dixon Venture after trial of remanded case 5/6/96 P.4, opinion P. 22.
ECRA/BANKRUPTCY In Re: Torwico Electronics Inc. Torwico Electronics Inc. v NJDEP D NJ Bankruptcy Court No. 87-006071 Judge signs Torwico judgment despite DEPE objection after barring collection under ECRA 10/7/91 P. 6, opinion P. 45, judgment P. 65.
ECRA/BANKRUPTCYIn Re Heldor Industries Inc.NJDEPE v. Heldor Industries Inc.D NJNo. 91-5701 (GEB)Judge denies NJDEPE's motion to vacate bankruptcy order that does not ensure ECRA compliance funds Bernard 5/18/92 P. 4.
ECRA/BANKRUPTCYIn Re: Torwico Electronics Inc.D NJNo. 92-1828 Judge rules Torwico's cleanup obligation under ECRA is not dischargeable unsecured claim in bankruptcy 12/7/92 P. 4, opinion P. 12. Judge rules ECRA cleanup is not unsecured bankrupcy claim 12/21/92 P. 4, opinion P. 12.Torwico files 3rd Circuit notice from ruling that ECRA cleanup is not unsecured claim 1/25/93 P. 10.
ECRA/CONSENT ORDER In Re: Morristown & Erie Railroad Co. E.S.C.A. 3rd Cir. No. 89-5077 3rd Cir. says court cannot order debtor to apply and post security for an ECRA administrative order 11/7/89 P. 9;
ECRA/IRSA In Re Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc.'s Facilities Located in Montgomery Township, NJ ECRA Case Nos. 85558.89785, 92098 Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-0588-92T1 Appellate Division says ACO bars sale of a separate site under ECRA; makes no ISRA application to ACO 1/10/94 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
ECRA/ISRA Dean Witter Services Co. Inc. v. Colpro Inc. et al. Hudson County Superior Court No. L-5317-94 Judge says former site owner has constractual right to install asphalt although future use will be affected 2/6/95 P. 4, opinion P. 27.
ECRA/OFF-SITE/STAY In Re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26B Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey et al. v. NJ DEP NJ Supreme Court No. 33,765 Chemical industry tells Supreme Court that DEP fails to justify petition to stay ECRA off-site ruling 8/19/91 P. 5, brief P. 38.
ECRA/PRIVATE ACTION Cooper Development Co. Inc. v. First National Bank of Boston as Trustee of the Cooper Laboratories Inc., Stockholders Liquidating Trust D NJ Judge allows private ECRA recovery by joint owner to recover part of its cleanup costs from other party 6/3/91 P. 4, opinion P. 49.
ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD IMO Appeal of Atlantic City Electric Co. etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5046-92T2 Panel finds that Atlantic City Electric substation will not create harmful electromagnetic field 6/20/94 P. 4, brief P. 15.
eloper five years to seek approvals for wetland site based on new plan 5/23/00 P. 8, stipulation P. 47. WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT George & Georgette Ezyske v. DEP OAL No. ESA 3700-93 ALJ finds construction of 80-foot dock and shading would inhibit migration of eelgrass, denies permit 6/20/00 P. 7.
EMERGENCY ACTION 'Delaware Bay Waterman's Association of New Jersey et al. v. NJDEP NJ Supreme Court No. A-102 Sept. Term 1997 Supreme Court says APA does not bar DEP from adopting two emergency rules for horseshoe crabs 4/7/98 P.6.
EMERGENCY REDIRECTION ORDER IMO Regarding Disposal Rates for Hudson, Passaic and Essex Counties etc. DEPE DEPE redirects waste to Essex County incinerator to eliminate out-of-state disposal in emergency 4/18/94 P. 11.
EMERGENCY REDIRECTION ORDER IMO Regarding Disposal Rates for Hudson, Passaic and Essex Counties etc. DEPE Shinn denies stay of redirecting order for Passaic and Hudson waste to Essex, sees no irreparable harm 5/9/94 P. 12.
EMERGENCY RELIEF/ SANITARY SEWER Gibbstown Center Associates v. NJDEP Appellate Div., Superior Court Gibbstown Shopping Center appeals DEP denial of emergency relief for use of sanitary sewers 7/24/90 12;
EMINENT DOMAIN/ OCEANFRONT Township of Long Beach v. Edward Schumann et al. Superior Court, Appellate Division No. A-2750-98T2 and related appeal Appellate Div. says Long Beach duly exercised eminent domain in condemnation of oceanfront access easements 3/21/00 P. 11, opinion P. 46.
EMISSIONS New Jersey Depaertment of Environmental Protection v. Frutarom Meer Corp. OAL No. EEQ 1930-98 Frutarom Meer agrees to $9,500 penalty and to modify existing permits to control VOC emissions at facility 4/12/00 P.14.
EMISSIONS TESTING New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Air and Environmental Quality Enforcement v. R.A. Hamilton Corp. OAL No. EEQ 11833-93 ALJ finds Hamilton failed to comply with stack testing conditions on three occasions at two facilities 11/21/94 P. 9, opinion P. 44.
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS Ironbound Health Rights Advisory Commission et al. v. Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co. et al. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-6300-88T3F Panel rejects emotional distress claims of Ironbound residents for exposure to dioxin 8/21/90 P. 5, , opinion P.
ENCROACHMENT/ FRESHWATER WETLANDS Objections to Stream Encroachment and Freshwater Wetlands Permits Issued to S.R. Enterprises Inc. etc. 11/8/93 P. 1 Acting commissioner stays stream encroachment and wetlands permits for OAL hearing on development 11/8/93 P. 11.
ENDANGERED SPECIES Hawksbill Sea Turtle et al. v. Federal Emergency Management Agency et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-7661 3rd Cir. finds notice defect in Endangered Species suit but orders consideration of new evidence on Tree Boa 10/7/97 P.12.
ENFORCEMENT $1.4 million in water pollution penalties issued 10.21.91 P. 13.
ENFORCEMENT $2.7 million penalty assessed against San Giacomo 9/11/90 P. 15; $1.3 million penalty for Precision Rolled Products 9/11/90 P. 15; $1.5-million in penalties for sewer hookups 9/11/90 P. 15;
ENFORCEMENT $445,000 penalty assessed against Chathan Glen plant 12/24/90 P. 11; $383,000 penalty against Port Norris plant 12/24/90 P. 11;
ENFORCEMENT DEP assessed $652,500 in penalties against Gorton for alleged NPDES violations in Cumberland County 11/23/90 P. 15;
ENFORCEMENT DEP assesses more than $3.5 million in NJPDES fines 1/22/91 P. 6;
ENFORCEMENT DEP fines Engineered Precision Casting Co. and owners $4.1 million for alleges violation of Clean Water Act 11/7/90 P. 16;
ENFORCEMENT DEP issues $632,000 penalty to Colonial Kitchens citing wastewater discharges in Salem County 3/4/91 P. 13; Exxon and Ford sign separate consent orders to comply with air pollution control standards 3/4/91 P. 14;
ENFORCEMENT DEPE v. Old Bridge Chemicals et al. Superior Court Middlesex County Judge signs order for Old Bridge Chemicals and Madison Industries to remove sludge pile 4/5/93 P. 15.
ENFORCEMENT Du Pont agrees to pay $1.85 million RCRA penalty to resolve disposal, testing violations at Deepwater 3/18/91 P. 8;
ENFORCEMENT IMO Allegations of Law Tempesta and Sons Inc. NJDEP Div. of Solid Waste Management NJDEPE initiates enforcement actions against companies for alleged illegal waste shipping 9/21/91 P. 12, order P. 23.
ENFORCEMENT Jenlabs decertified, $1.7-million penalty imposed; $60,000 settlement with General Felt Industries 5/8/90 P. 17;
ENFORCEMENT Jersey City Medical Center agrees to recommendations by state in connection with medical waste cleanup 7/10/90 P. 12; DEP imposes a $3.5-million in ECRA penalties 7/10/90 P. 13;
ENFORCEMENT Middlesex company agrees to $705,000 fine for violating Air Pollution Control Act 11/7/89 P. 16;
ENFORCEMENT NJDEP assesses three companies over $800,000 in civil penalties for alleged water pollution 5/6/91 P. 10; NJDEP assessed over $400,000 for alleged air pollution against five companies, two utilities 5/6/91 P. 11;
ENFORCEMENT Passaic authority agrees to $400,000 in penalties and to conform with air pollution control rules 2/18/91 P. 11; Mobil agrees to pay $811,919 for vapor violations 2/18/91 P. 11; NJDEP issues Ciba-Geigy ocean discharge permit that takes account of Supreme Court's concerns 2/18/91 P. 11;
ENFORCEMENT Sayreville Superfund alternatives to be discussed 8/7/90 P. 12; Public hearing on Marlboro Twp. site Aug. 14 8/7/90 P. 12;
ENTIRE CONTROVERSY K-Land Corp. No. 28 v. Landis Sewerage Authority and Berryman's Banch Ltd. Appellate Diviison of Superoir Court No. A-2223-00T5 Appellate Div. says action seeking reimbursement for sewer line is barred by entire controversy doctrine 11/7/01 P. 6, opinion P. 20.
ENTIRE CONTROVERSY DOCTRINE Standard Chlorine Chemical Corp. v. American Bankers Insurance Co. et al. Superior Court Hudson County No. HUD-L-1129-00 Judge finds Standard Chlorine Chemical is not precluded by subsidiary's suit in Delaware from suing insurers in NJ 11/20/01 P. 4, opinion P. 14.
ENTIRE CONTROVERSY DOCTRINE State of New Environmental Protection and NJ Pinelands Commission v. Branin Farms et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 3147-89T3 Appellate Division calls application of 'entire controversy doctrine' to Pinelands case 'unfair' 12/16/91 P. 8, opinion P. 35.
ENTIRE CONTROVERSY Sterling Winthrop Inc.. et al. v. Royal Indemnity Ins. Co.. et al., Superior Court, Mercer County No. MER-L-000106-94 and No. MER-L-000101-94 Judge allows additional claims for NY sites rather than have them litigated separately in New York 3/19/96 P. 10.
ENTIRE CONTROVERSY The Pittston Co. v. Sedgwick James of New York Inc. D NJ No. 96-1578 Judge invokes entire contrvoersydoctrine to tank port's claims 11/4/97 P. 10, opinion P. 37.
ENVIRONMENT WHISTLEBLOWER Valcar A. Bowmar v. Mobil Oil Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-5172 3rd Cir. dismisses Mobil's appeal verdict in favor of environmental 9/21/91 P. 9, order P. 22.
ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS Township of Voorhees v. DEPE ALJ No. 87-095L ALJ dismisses Voorhees's claim for installing wells at landfill which township bought after it closed 9/5/94 P. 10,opinion P. 53.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINAION ALLEGED Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif and PA Department of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. Chester Residents file new notice of appeal with 3rd Cir. from ruling there is no private action for discrimination 3/3/97 P. 11.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION ALLEGED C hester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif and PA Department of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd Cir. USCA No. 96-8099 3rd Circuit schedules argument in September in appeal by Chester Residents in action alleging discrimination 8/5/97 P. 13.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION ALLEGED Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif and PA Department ofEnvironmental Protection et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 96-3960 3/17/97 P. 12.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION ALLEGED Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif and PA Department ofEnvironmental Protection et al. 3rd Cir. USCA No. 96-8099 3rd Cir. denies Chester plaintiffs' petition to review issue of private suit over alleged environmental discrimination Herbert and Joyce Mitschele v.DEP OAL No. ESA 11832-95 ALJ dismisses appeal for failure to prosecute 2/17/97 P. 10.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION James M. Seif, as Secretary of the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection et al.v. Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 97-1620 U.S. Supreme Court agrees to review 3rd Circuit ruling that Chester Residents may allege environmental discrimination 6/23/98 P. 15.
ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRMINATION Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living et al. v. James M. Seif, as Secretary of the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. U.S. Spreme Court U.S. Supreme Court vacates 3rd Cir. decision which held that Chester residents may allege environmental discrimination 8/25/98 P.8.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey v. Federal Highway Administration 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-5210 PIRG wants 3rd Cir. to rule on whether environmental impact statement is required for NJ highway expansion 5/8/95 P. 12.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey v. Federal Highway Administration 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 95-5210 3rd Cir. affirms decision that environmental impact statement is not required for NJ highway expansion 7/24/95 P. 13
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Bruce Hain v. New Jersey Transit and Federal; Transit Administration D NJ No. 96-3068 Judge finds lack of evidence of error in NJT not preparing environmental impact statement 8/14/97 P.10.
ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTMENT CHARGE IMO Certain Amendments to … Solid Waste Management Plan of the Union County Solid Waste Management District Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5964-97T3 Citing Supreme Court, Appellate Div. says environmental investment charge imposed in Union County is invalid.7/24/00 P. 6, opinion P. 14.
ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTMENT CHARGE Township of Galloway et al. v. Atlantic County Utilities Authority Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1083-98T5 and National Solid Waste Management Association et al. v Atlantic County Utilities Authority Appellate Division No. A-1126-98T5 Appellate Div. holds Atlantic County environmental investment charge is invalid invalid.7/24/00 P.6, opinion P. 17. NJDEP, Solid Waste Compliance and Enforcement v. Township of West Milford OAL No. ESW 11311-99 ALJ approves $5,000 settlement for leaf composting 6/20/00 P. 13.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 3rd Cir. stays order that vacated permits for cement company to operate plant based on disparate impact discrimination 6/25/01 P. 4, order P. 14.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 St. Lawrence Cement insists appeal will have immediate and dramatic effect on environmental justice litigation 6/25/01 P. 5, brief P. 16.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 Seeking reconsideration, South Camden Citizens in Action says civil rights are not subordinate to environmental laws 6/25/01 P. 6, brief P. 18
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 EPA disparate impact regulations cannot be enforced under §1983 of Civil Rights Act, St. Lawrence Cement tells 3rd Cir. 7/10/01 P. 4, brief P. 16.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 PA legislative leaders say disparate impact decision could actually impair ability to address needs of ethnic groups 7/10/01 P. 6. Manufacturers tell 3rd Cir. hat 'disparate impact' could backfire 7/10/01 P. 5.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. D NJ Camden Vicinage No. 01cv702(SMO) Judge agrees his South Camden ruling on §602 is overruled but requests briefing on NJDEP discrimination under §601 5/7/01 P. 4, briefs P. 13, 33.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. D NJ Camden Vicinage No. 01cv702(SMO) Judge affirms injunction against cement plant after finding Supreme Court §602 decision does not foreclose §1983 5/22/01 P. 4, excerpt P. 13.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE South Camden Citizens in Action et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection et al. 3rd cir. U.S.C.A. Nos. Nos. 00-0224 and 00-2296 St. Lawrence Cement and DEP ask 3rd Cir. to find that claims of disparate impact air regulations in Camden are barred 6/5/01 P. 4, notice P. 15.
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CONVICTION William Fiore v. Gregory White et al. 3rd Cir U.S.C.A. No. 97-3288 Seeking rehearing, Fiore tells 3rd Cir. that conviction under PA solid waste law lacked proof beyond reasonable doubt 8/11/98 P.7, petition P. 12.
ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS ACT New Jersey's Environment v. State of New Jersey, Dept. of Corrections Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2283-89T5 Panel reverses dismissal of injunction against new prison facility under Rights Act 3/4/91 P. 11;
ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS ACT Shell Oil Co. v. Manchester Machinery Salvage Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4963-93T5 Appellate Div. allows Law Division action by Shell because DEP agency causes of action were different 8/21/95 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
ENVIRONMENTAL-JUSTICE--South Camden-Citizens in Action-et al. v. NJ Dept. of Environmental-Protection et al.-3rd Cir. U.S.C.A.-No. 01-2224 and 01-2296---3rd Cir. declares citizens cannot assert claims for disparate-racial impact for air permits for cement plant under §1983--12/28/01 P. 5. Opinion P. 36.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS NJDEP/Air and Environmental Quality Enforcement v. Duck Island Terminal Inc. OAL: No. EEQ 8866-97 ALJ affirms $1,000 penalty for failure to update ESA maps; outrage was expressed at mapping requirement 8/11/98 P.8, opinion P. 21. Shinn affirms $1,000 penalty for failure to update ESA maps; outrage was expressed at mapping requirement 10/21/98 P. 6.
EPA DATA REQUEST United States v. Block, Francis et al. D NJ No. 90-193(JHR) U.S. seeks penalties fro alleged failure to comply with information request for Ewan and other sites 3/20/90 P. 11; Two defendants deny failure to provide data to EPA, say data was provided to DEP as alter ego 4/24/90 P. 11;
EPA FAILURE TO ENFORCE Raymond Proffitt Foundation et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al. E.D. PA No. 99-4038 Judge allows citizen groups' claims that Corps of Engineers failed to incorporate environmental protection in its mission 9/15/00 P. 6.
EPA Penn Fuel Gas Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6178 Penn Fuel Gas files challenge in Third Circuit from EPA permits for gas caverns drilled through gas storage field 10/21/98 P.11.
EPA PERMITS Penn Fuel Gas Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6178 Penn Fuel Gas tells 3rd Cir. that EPA errs in permitting operation of salt solution wells through gas storage field 3/2/99 P. 8.
EPA PERMITS Penn Fuel Gas Inc. v. U.S. EPA 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 98-6178 EPA tells 3rd Cir. that underground injection control permits include conditions to prevent migration into drinking water 4/6/99 P.12.
EPA ROD United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. et al. D NJ No. 91-809 (CSF) Judge limits review of EPA's scope and standard for cleanup at two sites to administrative record 4/19/93 P. 7, opinion P. 32.
EPA ROD United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 Opinion that frequent DMR/lab reports can establish liability for discharge violations printed in this issue 6/7/93 P. 8.
EPA RULEMAKING State of Ohio et al. v. USEPA D.C. Cir USCA No. 86-1096 PA, NJ and 7 other states ask DC court for discovery on OMB..s influence in weakening environmental rule 1/22/91 P. 11;
EPA RULEMAKING State of Ohio v. U.S. EPA D.C. Cir. No. 86-1096 DC panel orders EPA to respond to discovery motion of NJ and 8 other states on weakening of rules 2/4/91 P. 13;
EPA RULES NJ DEP v. United States Environmental Protection Agency DC Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-1439 NJ, PA appeal new EPA rules that require states to assume responsibility for key Superfund costs 11/23/90 P. 13;
EPA RULES Rollins Environmental Services (NJ) Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency DC Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-1508 DC Circuit says Rollins violated EPA rule for disposa] at NJ site even without knowing clear meaning of rule 7/22/91 P. 9, opinion P. 50.
EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL Prudential Insurance Co. of America et al. v. United States Gypsum Co. et al. D NJ No. 87-4227 (HM) and related case Prudential moves to strike time-bar defenses in suit over $400 million to remove asbestos in 39 buildings 11/18/91 P. 9.
EROSION Dover Township v. Dover, A Limited Partnership, Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6296-91T5 Appellate Division sees error for fact finder to assume clearing of land lead to erosion 3/21/94 P. 12.
ESTATE'S LIABILITYBowen Engineering and Niro Atomizer Acquisition Co. Inc. v. The Estate of Ralph T. Reeve and the Reeve Co. D NJ No. 89-2649 (AET) Officer liability: Judge says estate's counterclaim results in indemnity for any recovery by company 10/5/92 P. 6, opinion P. 40.
EVIDENCE Joshua Hill Inc. et al. v. Whitemarsh Township Authority et al. E.D. PA No. 96-5648 Judge finds lack of evidence that hazardous substances, although present, are being released from former PA landfill 10/10/00 P. 6
EVIDENCE Caterinicchio Peter et al. v . Pittsburgh Corning Corp. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4706-88T2 Panel reverses $100,000 pleural thickening award, cites lack of evidence of asbestos exposure 12/11/90 P. 13;
EVIDENCE Fred Harris and Ella McAdams-Smith v. Peridot Chemical (New Jersey) Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1466-96T3 Appellate Division says evidence of subsequent remedial measures is admissible to rebut environmental defense 7/14/98 P. 6.
EVIDENCE In Matter of Vineland Chemical Co. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-2724-89T3 Panel said 'credible evidence' for denying permit doesn't require harm demonstrated 'with precision' 8/21/90 P. 4, opinion P. 15;
EVIDENCE OF TOXICITY Township of Mansfield et al. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-14-96T3 Appellate Div. affirms sufficiency of evidence to test 'nonhazardous' nature of contaminated soil 1/5/98 P .5, opinion P. 47.
EVIDENCE United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. v. George Sands et al. D NJ No. 91-809 (CSF) Judge finds lack of evidence that J&R contributed to contamination at two sites in Somerset County 7/5/93 P. 6, opinion P. 22.
EVIDENCE/ WATER POLLUTION Salem Packing Co. v. DEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1454-92T3 Appellate Div. says evidence that pollution 'might' reach groundwater and surface water is sufficient 7/18/94 P. 9, opinion P. 58.
EX PARTE CONTACTS Public Service Electric and Gas Co. v. Associated Electric & Gas Insurance Services Ltd. D NJ No. 88-4811 Judge reverses magistrate's order that allowed interviews with former PSE&G employees 10/23/90 , opinion P. 21;
EX PARTE INTERVIEWS State of New Jersey v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2289-90T1F Panel bars ex parte interviews with certain Ciba-Geigy employees in criminal landfill dumping case 4/22/91 P. 8, opinion P. 20;
EXCESS COVERAGE Carter Wallace Inc. v. Admiral Insurance Co. NJ Supreme Court No. A-129-97 Supreme Court adopts calcuation of share of responsibility in each year of trigger period for environmental coverage 7/14/98 P. 6.
EXPERT Devon Manor of Kearny Inc. et a. v. Estate of Joseph C. Cassini Jr. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No.A-3613-99T5 Appellate Div. finds no expert report links former owner of property to any contamination on site 9/27/01 P. 9.
EXPERT TESTIMONY Hines Oscar v. Consolidated Rail Corp. v. General Electric Co. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 89-1350 3rd Cir. finds expert's opinion improperly excluded; same expert's testimony figures in Paoli decision 3/4/91 P. 10;
EXPERT TESTIMONY Landrigan et al. v. The Celotex Corp. et al. NJ Supreme Court A-2/3/4 Sept. Term 1991 NJ Supreme Court gives guidelines for expert witnesses; reverses appellate court's rejection 5/18/92 P. 5, opinion P. 27.
EXPERT TESTIMONY/ PROPERTY VALUE General Electric Co. et al. v. Patricia Ingram U.S. Supreme Court No. 94-1070 U.S. Supreme Court denies review of 3rd Cir.'s ruling on legal standards for admissibility of experts on PCBs 3/7/95 P. 8.
EXPERT TESTIMONY/ PROPERTY VALUE In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1995 3rd Cir. rules that property owners near CERCLA site can claim damages from diminution of property value 9/5/94 P. 4, opinion P. 12.
EXPERTS/CAUSATION Landrigan, Angelina v. Celotex Corp. et al. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-5064-88T1 Factually groundless 'net opinion' is inadequate to prove that colon cancer was caused by asbestos 9/11/90 P. 12; opinion 10/9/90 P. 36;
EXPERTS/MEDICAL MONITORING General Electric Co. et al. v. Mary Alice Knight et al. U.S. Supreme Court No. 90-1309 Supreme Court lets Paoli PCB evidence ruling stand allowing novel opinions and medical monitoring 4/22/91 P. 11;
EXPOSURE TO CHEMICALS Lance Bobo et al. v Emsig Manufacturing Corp. et al. and AMC Logos et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2086-95T1 Appellate Division reverses dismissal of workers' claims of exposure to chemicals based on statute of limitations 5/21/97 P. 9, opinion P. 32.
FAILURE TO APPEAR NJDEP V. Atlantic Painting Co. OAL No. HC-009-97 ALJ says failure to appear for SWMA hearing makes civil penalty assessment a final order 6/8/99 P.15.
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Herbert and Joyce Mitchele v. DEP OAL No. SA 11832-95 ALJadismisses appeal of DEP letter on freshwater wetlands. 2/17/97 P. 12.
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Peter D. Cronin v. DEPE OAL No. ESA 9298-92 ALJ dismisses two appeals for failure to prosecture 9/6/93 P.12.
FEDERAL SITE United States of America v. PA DER 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 90-5337 3rd Cir. says U.S.claim of superior federal interest against PADER cleanup order requires further hearing 2/4/91 P. 12;
FEES High Voltage Engineering Corp. v. Pride Solvents & Chemical Co. of New Jersey Inc. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-1463-98T2 Appellate Div. affirms $84,605 in counsel fees to previous owner of contaminated property, cites settlement agreement 12/21/99 P. 7, opinion P. 31.
FEES NJDEP v. Gloucester Management Services Inc. et al. D NJ No. 84-0152 (SSB) GEMS liaison seeks order for 18 companies to pay share of $166,753.74 for alleged generators group 9/11/90 P. 14, table P. 70; Magistrate orders 'good faith' effort by GEMS parties to allocate $400,000 for unexpected study 10/9/90 P. 6, order P. 23, form P. 25;
FEES/ CERCLA/ SPILL ACT Fishbein Family Partnership v. PPG Industires Inc. and PSE&G D NJ No. 93-653 (WHW) Magistrate awards UGI $177,798.77 in attorneys' fees and costs because of PSE&G 's third-party action 8/21/95 P. 6, opinion P. 37.
FEES/ CLEAN WATER ACT Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey Inc. et al. v. Sheila E. Windall, Secretary of the Air Force 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5771 3rd Circuit uses entire District of New Jersey as relevant market for legal rate in PIRG's Clean Water Act lawsuit 4/24/95 P. 6, opinion P. 37. FIBER DRIFT Robertson, Charles A. et al. v. Allied Signal Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 89-2123 and 89-2124 3rd Cir. allows 'fiber drift' theory in workplace supported by evidence of use and employment 9/11/90 P. 13;
FILL CREDITS Residuary Trust of Anthony Pio Costa etc. v. DEP OAL NO. ESA 12435-94 ALJ rejects use of 'fill credits' for project where 'zero net fill' rule is in use in Central Passaic Basin 12/17/96 P. 9.
FILL CREDITS Residuary Trust of Anthony Pio Costa II et al. v. Robert C. Shinn Jr., et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4330-96T5 Zero net fill rule for Central Passaic Basin uses 1977 as base year, not 1929, Appellate Division declares 6/23/98 P.13.
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY NJDEP v. Reheis Inc. OAL No. EEQ 9224-99 ALJ approves reduction of penalty from $5,000 to $1,000 after evidence of financial responsibility from insurer 4/12/00 P. 10.
FINES NJDEP v. Sechler Foods Inc. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-6125-87T3 Panel says air pollution standards are not unconstitutionally vague, affirms $64,000 in fines 11/6/90 P. 9, opinion P. 34;
FISHING Albert Shelton v. DEPE Divisoni of Fish, Game and Wildlife OAL No. EFG 195-93 DEPE deputy commission er rejects challenge to issuance of gill net fishing regulations 7/19/93 P. 7.
FISHING Ampro FisheriesInc. v. JudithYaskin et al.New Jersey Supreme CourtNo. A-62/63Sept. Tenn 1991N.J. Supreme Court says bi-state compact does not prohibit unilateral NJ fishing rules in Delaware Bay 6/15/92 P. 8.
FISHING Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish, Game & Wildlife v. Lance Naylor OAL No. EFG 277-99 Shinn revokes horseshoe crab permit for two years 12/6/99 P. 10.
FISHING New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Thomas K. Reeves Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1508-92T3 and related appeal Appellate Div. finds no loss of due process in DEPE's prohibition against dredging for horseshoe crabs 2/21/94 P. 7, opinion 50.
FLOOD CONTROL,Laurjo Construction, Co. v. Division of,Coastal Resources,DEP OAL,No. ESA 9205-89 ALJ finds basis for Flood Control hardship waiver but wants submission of stream encroachment plan 10/7/91 P. 11
FLOOD CONTROL/PENALTIES State of New Jersey, Deptartment. of Environmental Protection v. Highbridge Lakes Development Co. Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3148-89T3 Appellate Div. reverses dismissal of DEP claims regarding construction within 100-year flood plain 12/2/91 P. 8, opinion P. 44.
FLOOD HAZARD CONTROL/ FRESHWATER WETLANDS DEPE v. Miguel Ruelan OAL No. ESA 11444-91 ALJ orders $9,000 penalty and restoration of wetlands for placing fill in 100-year Gloucester Twp. floodplain 7/19/93 P. 6, opinion P. 33.
FLOOD PLAIN Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Division of Water Resources v. Robert Mondgock Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4426-91T5 Appellate Div. says DEPE's order to restore wetlands where pond was dug isn't proportionate to culpability 6/7/93 P. 4 opinion P. 130
FLOODING IMO LOI to TCR Mid-Atlantic/ NJ Properties Inc. No. 0719-990001.1 Possiblity of flooding from feared loss of wetlands is inadequate for third-party hearing, Shinn states 10/24/00 P.8, order P. 35.
FLOW CONTROL (Also see WASTE FLOW INTERSTATE for Atlantic Coast Demolition and Recycling Inc. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Atlantic County et al. D NJ No. 93-2669 and related case
FLOW CONTROL Borough of Haddon Heights et al. v. Robert Shinn Jr. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5394 3rd Cir. grants NJ's motion to stay flow control appeal of seven municipalities until ruling in Atlantic Coast 11/7/94 P. 14.
FLOW CONTROL Borough of Haddon Heights et al. v. Robert Shinn Jr. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-5394 Haddon Heights tells 3rd Cir. that NJ's waste flow regulations are same in purpose and form as Carbone 10/10/94 P. 8.
FLOW CONTROL CHAPTER 11 In Re: R.T. Opdenaker & Sons Inc. v. County of Delaware et al. and J & K Trash Removal Inc. v. County of Delaware et al. E.D. PA Bankruptcy Court No. 96-13857DAS Adv. No. 96-0569DAS and related case Bankruptcy court judge sees no need for court to abstain from issue involving challenged flow control law impact 7/8/96 P. 9.
FLOW CONTROL Delaware County and Delaware County Solid Waste Authority v. Raymond T. Opdenaker & Sons Inc. and other appeals Commonwealth Court No. 34 C.D. 1994 A appeals court declines to ban county ordinance that bars waste disposal in non-designated facilities 1/9/95 P. 12.
FLOW CONTROL Grand Central Sanitation Inc. v. City of Bethlehem E.D. PA No. 94-5928 Judge denies preliminary injunction for 'flow control' ordinance in PA, awaiting Atlantic Demolition decision 11/21/94 P. 7.
FLOW CONTROL Harvey & Harvey Inc. v. County of Chester, Pennsylvania, PA Department of Environmental Resources et al 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-1924 and Tri-County Industries Inc. v. County of Mercer, Pennsylvania, et al. 3rd Cir. U.S. C.A. No. 94-3622 3rd Cir. denies Tri-County rehearing of decision that PA flow control case be remanded for 'level playing field' 12/4/95 P. 9.
FLOW CONTROL Harvey & Harvey Inc. v. County of Chester, Pennsylvania, PA Department of Environmnetal Resources et al 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-1924 and . Tri-County Industries Inc. v. County of Mercer, Pennsylvania, et al. 3rd Cir. U.S. C.A. No. 94-3622 3rd Cir. remands two PA flow control cases to determine if out-of-state interests had access to 'level playing field 10/12/95 P. 6.
FLOW CONTROL Passaic County Utilities Authority v. Frank's Sanitation Inc. and Pequannock Diiposal Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2555-93T1 Panel affirms $25,000 penalties for waste flow violations, but also sees possible 'legitimate legal purpose' for rules 7/10/95 P. 5, opinion P. 30.
FLOW CONTROL Tri-County Industries Inc. v. County of Mercer and DER 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-3622 DER tells 3rd Cir. that Atlantic Coast does not apply to PA plans, cites differences from NJ's flow control 4/24/95 P. 13. 3rd Cir. sets argument on June 26 in PADER's argument that Atlantic Coast ruling does not apply to PA plans 5/8/95 P. 14.
FLOW CONTROL Tri-County Industries Inc. v. County of Mercer and PA Dept. of Environmental Resources W.D. PA No. 93-592 Judge rules PA county's disposal plan unconstitutional because of failure to prove nondiscriminatory alternatives 11/7/94 P. 13.
FLOW CONTROL/ DEFENSE Board of Regulatory Commissioners v. Jersey Carting Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1803-92T2 Appellate Div. says Jersey Carting cannot use defense that flow control is unconstitutional under Carbone 9/5/94 P. 6, opinon P. 16.
FLOW CONTROL/ JURISDICTION Delaware County Solid Waste Authority and County of Delaware v. Hinkson Container Service Inc. E.D. PA No. 96-6100 Federal judge says PA county's suit against hauler does not raise constitutional claim despite 'flow control' argument 1/6/97 P. 10.
FLOW IMO Allegation of Violations of Law and Adminstrative Code by A. Fiore & Sons Inc. etc. NJ Supreme Court No. 45119 Retroactive application of Atlantic Coast II is being addressed in several lower courts in New Jersey 2/2/98 P.6
FORUM NON CONVENIENS Hudson Industries Corp. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. et al Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-87-94T1 Panel says NY state, where landfills are, is proper forum although NJ is principal place of business 10/9/95 P. 13.
FORUM Unisys Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2685-4T5 Appellate Div. says NJ is appropriate forum for Unisys' action against insurers; four of 35 Sperry sites in state 7/24/95 P. 11.
FORUM/ OAL State of New Jersey, Board of Public Utilities and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Sal Car Transfer Systems Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3831-92T2 and A-3893-92T2 Appellate Division says OAL is appropriate forum for appeals involving permit for solid waste facility 7/18/94 P. 14.
FORUM/STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS Snyder, Carmella et al. v. Claridge At Park Place Inc. E.D. PA No. 89-6760 Judge in PA applies that state's two-year time bar to suit against Claridge hotel by couple from PA 9/25/90 P. 14;
FRAUD CLAIM / FAILURE TO WARN Mann, Peter C. et al. v. Paul V. Profeta Appellate Division, Superior Court No. A-3572-88T1 Judge finds fraud in failure to warn buyer that home was fully insulated with urea-formaldehyde foam 4/10/90 P. 10, opinion P. 50;
FRESHWATER Goodwin v. DEPE, Land UseRegulaiton Element OAL No. ESA 3276-92 ALJ says petitioner seeking freshwater wetlands permit declined to offer testimony on housing 1/25/93 P. 10 .
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Borough of Roseland v. NJDEP et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-005634-97T5 Appellate Div. affirms borough's lack standing for hearing on letter of interpretation that wetlands are not present 11/25/99 P. 8, opinion P. 41.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Borough of Roseland v. NJDEP et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-005634-97T5 Appellate Div. affirms borough's lack standing for hearing on letter of interpretation that wetlands are not present 11/25/99 P. 8, opinion P. 41.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Leonard Verity and Ruth Verity v. DEP OAL No. ESA 4730-97 Shinn says lot that was part of 1987approval is not exempt from wetlands transition area 12/8/99 P.9, decision P. 50.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Leonard Verity and Ruth Verity v. DEP OAL No. ESA 4730-97 Shinn says lot that was part of 1987approval is not exempt from wetlands transition area 12/8/99 P.9, decision P. 50.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Louis Matirko and Denise Matirko v. NJ Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2770-97T3 Appellate Div. says 'accessory structures' fall within FWPA exemption for projects approved prior to July 1, 1988 5/12/99 P. 6, opinion P. 49.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Molasses Hill Inc. v. DEP, Land Usae Regulatoin OAL No. ESA 6938-99 DEP revises a letter of interpretation for wetlands after Inspectoins and land owner submits more information 8/18/00 P. 13.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS NJDEP/Coastal & Land Use Enforcement v. Eugene Robert Paul OAL No. ESA 4926-97 ALJ rescinds $24,000 penalty for septic system in wetlands, says hostility toward DEP staff is not a punishable action 12/8/99 P. 6.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS NJDEP/Coastal & Land Use Enforcement v. Eugene Robert Paul OAL No. ESA 4926-97 ALJ rescinds $24,000 penalty for septic system in wetlands, says hostility toward DEP staff is not a punishable action 12/8/99 P. 6.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS NJDEP/Coastal & Land Use Enforcement v. Eugene Robert Paul OAL No. ESA 4926-97 Calling it 'a close question,' Shinn affirms initial decision rescinding $24,000 penalty for septic system in wetland 5/25/99 P.9, decision P. 56.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Request for Hearing of Washington Township etc. Nos. 1438-97-005.1 etc. Shinn says township is not entitled to third-party hearing on modifying standard 50-foot transition area near wetlands 4/6/99 P.7, decision P. 44.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Andrew Seemar and Kathleen Seemar v. Department of Environmental Protection OAL No. ESA 5232-93 ALJ says owners are barred from wetland construction despite building permit issued by township officer 3/20/95 P. / 9.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Charles Zimmer v. DEPE OAL No. ESA 11432-91 ALJ affirms denial of freshwater wetlands permit for access road crossing wetlands 150 linear feet 6/21/93 P. 9.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Darwin Griffith/ Tall Cedars v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 6-24-93T2 Appellate Div. reverses DEP commissioner's restriction on width of access road through wetlands as 'arbitrary' 6/11/96 P. 4, opinion P. 38.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Federal Business Centers Inc. et al. OAL No. ESA 923-93 ALJ says employees are not insulated from liability for violation of Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act 1/10/94 P. 7, opinion P. 15.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Department of Environmental Protection v. James and Rosario Rapisardi OAL No. ESA 3739-94 ALJ rejects argument that wetlands activities are exempt because they occurred prior to July 1, 1988 date of Act 8/7/95 P. 8.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Department of Environmental Protection v. Jon Ludlam OAL NO. ESA 10587-91 ALJ imposes $9,000 fine for excavating and filling intermediate resource wetland in Cherry Hill Twp. 5/23/95 P. 9, decision P. 39.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Department of Environmental Protecton, Bureau of Coastal and Land Use Enforcement v. Mt. Bethel Humus Company Inc. OAL No. ESA 3618-93 ALJ says misleading DEP statements do not ease compliance. 6/6/95 P. 10, opinin P. 16.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Gerald and Diane Debrin OAL No. ESA 11320-99 ALJ finds approves consent decree that restores wetlands and calls for $4800 penalty and DEP scrutiny 10/10/00 P. 8, agreement P. 48.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS I/M/O Third Party Hearing Concerning Freshwater Wetlands Statewide General Permit #5 Issue fo Beach Avenue Associates LURP No. 0502-95-0004.5 Shinn reject third party hearing, says law does not allow delay if permit increases pre-existing drainage problem 9/10/01 P.10, order P. 42.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS IMO Freshwater Wetlands Individual Permit to Closter Temple Associates Appellate Division Superior Court No. A-236-98T2 Panel finds fear of lost recreation or generalized property rights no basis for third party hearing 12/6/99 P. 9, opinion P. 21.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS IMO Freshwater Wetlands Individual Permit to Closter Temple Associates Appellate Division Superior Court No. A-236-98T2 Panel finds fear of lost recreation or generalized property rights no basis for third party hearing 12/6/99 P. 9, opinion P. 21.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS IMO Issuance of aWaterfront DevelopmentPermit #87-1235Appellate Divison ofSuperior CourtNo. A-3113-89T5Appellate Div. finds nationwide permit for freshwater wetlands parcel exempts facility from DEP regulation 7/6/92 P. 5, opinion P. 19.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS IMO Request by Nancy J. Meon for a Third Party Hearing etc. DEP Permit Nos. 1414-96-0008.2 etc. Shinn says third party has no right or interest at stake that requires hearing on three stormwater discharges 12/8/97 P.10.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS IMO Request for Adjudicatory Administrative Hearing by the Borough of Point Pleasant Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2759-94T2 Panel says borough has no right to adjudicatory hearing on statewide general permits for wetlands 6/11/96 P. 9.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS In Re Authorizaiton for Freshwater Wetlands Statewide General Permit No. 6 DEP File No. 1215-94-0003.4 Shinn says adjoining property owners have no standing for hearing on Wetlands Statewide General Permit No. 6 12/8/97 P. 10.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS In Re Authorization for Freshwater Wetlands Statewide General Permit No. 6 DEP File No. 1215-94-0003.4 Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1602-96T1 Appellate Div. upholds right to appeal freshwater wetlands general permit but finds stormwater damage too speculative 1/27/00 P. 6, opinion P. 42.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS In Re Farcal Realty Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6112-91T3 Panel says plan submitted prior to June 1987 but not approved later is not a basis for wetlands exemption 9/20/93 P. 9, opinion P. 37.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS In the Matter of Issuance of Individual Freshwater Wetlands Permit #1422-90-0013 etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6568-93T1 Appellate Division finds no alternative to filling in wetlands for construction of jail in Morris County 3/4/96 P. 4, opinion P. 18.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS In the Matter of Request for Administrative Hearing on Freshwater Wetlands Exemption for Stein Built Homes Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5661-91T5 Appellate Div. says reduction of homes from 18 to 14 does not require revoking wetlands exemption 11/22/93 P.5, opinion P. 29.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Jeffrey Dautel v. DEP Land Use Regulation Program OAL No. ESA 5991-96 Residence would be on site suitable fro barred owle's feeding, resting 8/11/98 P. 11, opinion P. 34.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS John and Camille Frazer v. DEPE OAL No. ESA 7748-90 ALJ orders DEPE to issue wetlands permit for property adjacent to site for which similar permit was granted 2/7/94 P. 6, 43.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Joseph C. Luchese v. DEP OAL No. ESA 6886-94 ALJ says minimal loss is no reason to exclude particular wetlands from protection of GP#10 requirements 9/18/95 P. 8, decision P. 33.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Joseph P. Luchese v. State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Eneregy Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2340-93T1 Appellate Div. finds FWPA applies to property on which farming began before clerk made map availability known 2/6/95 P. 4, opinion P. 31.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Leonard Verity and Ruth Verity v. DEP OAL No. ESA 4730-97 ALJ says lot is not exempt from Wetlands Act although first subdivision was approved before effective date 8/25/98 P.11.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Lottie Lacki as agent for Carkolari Corp. v. DEP OAL No. ESA 11219-94 ALJ finds practical alternative in smaller house built on less than acre of freshwater wetland; denies permit 1/22/96 P. 11.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Lottie Lacki as agent for Carkolari Corp. v. DEP OAL No. ESA 11219-94 Text of decision on alternative smaller house built on less than acre of freshwater wetlands is printed 2/5/96 P. 15.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS M. Alfieri Co. Inc. v. NJDEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-976-92T3 Appellate Div. remands wetlands case to determine if owner had obtained nationwide permit from Corps 1/24/94 P. 6, opinion P. 28.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Manroe Builders Inc. v. NJDEPE OAL No. ESA 9349-91 ALJ rejects argument that exemption from subdivision approval entitles developer to wetlands exemption3/22/93 P. 9, decision P. 55.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS MCG Associates et al. v. Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-3174-93T1 Appellate Div. finds subdivision and site plans approved before July 1, 1989 are exempt from transition area rules 12/19/94 P. 4, opinion P. 19.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Morich/Fish v.NJDEPNJ Supreme CourtNo. 35,851 NJ Supreme Court allows FWPA ruling that exempts minor subdivisions approved prior to July 1,1988 12/21/92 P. 7.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Mt. Bethel Humus Co. Inc. v. DEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4611-92T5 Appellate Div. says preliminary site plan for soil removal was not approved prior to date of FWPA 6/6/94 P. 14, opinion P. 45.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Parks v. NJDEP Appellate Div., Superior Court DEP asks Supreme Court to review ruling that allows site specific exemptions to Wetlands Act 7/10/90 P. 11;
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Harry and Suzanne Toufayan Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3111-94T2 Appellate Div. has reservations that wetland 'activities' without project approval by 1988 can enjoy exemption 5/6/96 P.6, opinion P. 53.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Coastal and Land Use Enforcement v. Mt. Bethel Humus Co. Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. 92-95T2 Panel reverses DEP order to restore clay mining area, orders further finding on humus extraction before FWPA 6/11/96 P. 11.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Jon Ludlam Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-0901-95T2 Appellate Div. affirms $9000 penalty and restoration order for digging channel within stream easement 6/24/97 P. 12, opinion P. 18.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Coastal and Land Use Enforcement v. Janovic Construction Co. et al. Appelllate Division of Superior Court No. A-5295-95T1 Appellate Div. rejects argument that property owner is not liable for wetlands fill placed without his approval. 8/5/97 P. 4, opinion P. 28.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Coastal and Land Use Enforcement v. Janovic Construction Co. et al. OAL No. ESA 4409-92 and related actions ALJ says property owner cannot shift responsibility for wetlands fill to others even if they were not authorized 1/8/96 P. 12.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Ocean County Chapter Inc. of The Izaak Walton League of America v. Department of Environmental Protection and Energy et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1101-95T2 Appellate Div. says opponents failed to prove DEP's settlement of wetlands delineation was unreasonable 4/22/97 P.8, opinion P. 22.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT M. Alfieri Co. Inc. v. DEPE NJ Supreme Court Docket No. 38,117 DEP says nationwide wetlands system cited by Alfieri became void when state implemented own system 12/5/94 P.4, Opinion P. 10.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT M. Alfieri Co. Inc. v. DEPE NJ Supreme Court Docket No. 38,117 Supreme Court rules that site plan, subivision approvals under MPA do not exempt projects from FWPA permits 1/23/95 P. 4, order P. 13.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT M. Alfieri Co. Inc. v. DEPE NJ Supreme Court Docket No. 38,117 Supreme Court asks for supplemental briefing on FWPA exemption for projects preliminarily approved under MPA 11/7/94 P. 6, letter P. 35.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT M. Alfieri Co. Inc. v. DEPE NJ Supreme Court Docket No. 38,117 Text of state's brief with Supreme Court on nationwide wetlands system becoming void is printed in this issue 12/19/94 P. 11, brief P. 48.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Robert Juliano and Sissel Juliano Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4504-93T2 Panel says penalty for mowing grass in violation of FWPA was 'arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable' 4/24/95 P. 4, opinion P. 25.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Riverdale Quarry Company Inc. v. NJDEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3873-92T1 Appellate Div. reverses denial of wetlands exemption, allows discovery into existence of board's approval 3/21/94 P. 9.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Rochelle Park v. DEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court DEPE is not estopped from correcting erroneous grant of wetlands permit, Appellate Division says 7/19/93 P. 6.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Roy J. and J. Gordon Zaloom v. Division of Coastal Resources, NJDEPE No. A-281 1-91T1 Appellate Div. says DEPE improperly denied wetlands permit; finds no designation or surface water tributary 5/10/93 P. 4, opinion P. 15.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Roy Wimmer v. Land Use Regulation Program NJDEP OAL No. ESA 7828-94 ALJ finds wetland parcels are not adjacent to 'improved' sites but that owner refused to conservation group's offer 4/9/96 P. 16.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Sal Campo v. NJDEP OAL ESA 152199 Appellant concurs in DEP motion for summary judgment, claims lack of reasonable economic use under regulations 9/20/01 P. 14, decisions 27, 31.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS State of New Jersey v. David L. Robertson Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5662-93T2 Appellate Div. says jury was not allowed to determine if defendant knew area he filled was actually wetland
FRESHWATER WETLANDS State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection v. James Rapisardi and Rosario Rapisardi Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1448-95T3 Appellate Div. finds FWPA permit unnecessary for two areas on farm, but affirms DEP order for another area 10/21/97 P.7, opinion P. 26.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Temple Emanuel v. DEPE OAL No. ESA 858-91 Water flow by way of a man-made system and into river does not make 'isolated wetland,'ALJ says 3/22/93 P. 8.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Hearing Request to Challenge Issuance of Transiton Area Waiver Reduction to Malcolm and Margaret Davies DEP File No, 0243-90-0003.3 Shinn finds transition area waiver is necessary t9 avoid substantial hardhsip to applicants 3/17/97 P. 8, decision P. 23.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Hearing Request to Challenge Issuance of Freshwater Wetlands General Permits #6 and #7 to Fantini Construction DEP Nos. 2012-95-0002.2 & .3 Shinn finds objectors have no right to hearing on issuance of freshwater wetlands permit for .33 acres for residences. 2/17/97 P. 7. decision P. 18.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Hearing Request to Challenge Issuance of Freshwater Wetlands Individual Permit to Closter Temple Associates Permit No. 0207-95-0002.4 ¨DEP Shinn finds fear of lost recreation or generalized property rights is no basis for third party hearing 9/11/98 P.10.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Request for Hearing and Stay of Raymond Kutcher to Appeal Transition Area Waiver etc. File No. 1612-96-0001.3 Shinn cites failure to claim any right to hearing on freshwater wetlands transition waiver 10/7/97 P.9, decsion P. 51.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Request for Hearing of Albert and Barbara Burchell etc. File No. 0253-95-0002.3 et al. Shinn says nature of concerns do not merit hearing on transition area waiver-averaging plan approval 2/17/98 P.10, order P. 23.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Third Party Request of Brenda Curnin re Freshwater Wetlands Letter of Interpretation Issued to Salvatore Cangiano DEP No. 1802-92-0018.4 Shinn says DEP reviewed property to determine wetlands, rejects third-party hearing based in part on denial of access 12/6/99 P. 10.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS William R. Haldane v. DEPE OAL No. ESA 7013-92 ALJ urges DEPE to cooperate following more complete application for marina near Oyster Creek nuclear plant 10/18/93 P. 8, opinon P. 19.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS Wolfpaw Joint Venture v. NJDEP, OAL No. ESA 4362-95 ALJ bars FWPA exemption for golf course based on prior MLUL approval or farming exemption 7/21/97 P. 6, decision P. 16.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS/ CONDEMNATION Darwin R. Griffith v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division No. A-4260-97T1 Appellate Div. reverses FWPA inverse condemnation ruling, says DEP should get opportunity to ameliorate owner's loss 5/12/99 P.10, decision P. 53.
FRESHWATER WETLANDS/ INVERSE CONDEMNATION Richard C. Goodwin, General Partner of N.I.F. of New Jersey v. NJ DEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1244-95T2 Appellate Div. rejects inverse condemnation claim, says developer failed to exhaust administrative remedies 1/6/97 P. 6, opinion P. 20.
FRESHWATERWETLANDSIn the Matter of Freshwater Wetlands Permit No. 0409-91-0024,2Appellate Division of Superior CourtNo. A-4806-91T2Appellate Div. rejects argument that FWPA requires finding 'no practicable alternative' for road widening 10/18/93 P. 5, opinion P. 12.
FTCA Herbert Zschiegner et al v. United States of America et al. D NJ No. 99-4978 (WHW) Judge allows claims against EPA employees to survive relating to removal of hazardous waste from Superfund site 3/21/00 P. 5, decision P. 32.
FUTURE DAMAGES ITP Urban Renewal Associates et al. v.A&MDevinoUsed Trucks and Parts, Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court Appellate Division vacates order making defendants liable for undefined future environmental claims 3/9/92 P. 5, opinion P. 51.
FWCA Division of Costal Resources, Dept. of Environmental Protection v.l Angel of the Sea Development Corp. et al. OAL No. ESA 5362-89 ALJ applies strict liability to Wetlands Act violation, orders developer to restore two acres in Cape May 4/22/91 P. 5, opinion P. 43;
FWPA Fish v. New Jersey DEP etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5080-9OT2 and consolidated cases Panel rules that minor subdivisions approved prior to July 1,1988 are exempt from FWPA 9/21/92 P. 9, opinion P. 22.
FWPA Patrick Calella v. DEP, Land Use Regulation Element OAL No. ESA 11848-93 ALJ denies FWPA exemption for pond as part of harvesting of forest products in farming area 1/9/95 P. 9, opinion P. 27.
FWPA Windmill Properties Inc. v. NJDEPE Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-441 5-9OT5 Panel says return of subdivision application while fee was retained is not basis for denying FWPA exemption 9/7/92 P. 8, opinion P. 26.
GARBAGE COLLECTION Manella Sanitation Inc. v. Bridgwater Township and Raritan Valley Disposal Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court A-2355-91T2 Appellate Division funds good faith effort to comply with garbage collection post-award requirements 2/6/93 P. 10.
GARBAGE River Terrace Gardens Associates v. Borough of River Edge App Div No. A-518-96T2 Reversing, Appellate Div says hearing is needed on borough's obligation to collect complex's garbage. 11/12/97 P. 11
GENERAL RELEASE/ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITIES Mobay Corp. v. Allied-Signal Inc. et al. D NJ No. 89-4268 Judge says general release was not specific enough to transfer Allied-Signal's CERCLA liability to Mobay 1/22/91 P. 5, opinion P. 27;
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY FMC Corp. v. U.S. Department of Commerce et al. 3rd Cir.U.S.C.A. No. 92-1945 3rd Cir. says U.S. is liable for cleanup of private World War II facility as 'operator' and 'arranger' 7/18/94 P. 6.
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY FMC CORP. V. U.S. Dept. of Commerce E.D. PA No. 90-1761 For first time, U.S. Gov't held liable under CERCI A for cleanup costs for activities during World War II 3/9/92 P. 10.
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY/ TOXIC TORT Redland Soccer Club Inc. et al. v. Department of the Army of the United States of America and the United States of America 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-7829 3rd Cir. says toxic tort plaintiffs failed to prove greater than normal risk from exposure to Army landfill in PA 5/23/95 P. 7.
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY/ TOXIC TORT Redland Soccer Club Inc. et al. v. Department of the Army of the United States of America and the United States of America 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-7829 Redland appellants challenge 3rd Circuit opinion that they failed to prove greater than normal risk exposure 6/19/95 P. 12.
GREEN ACRES John J. Hrebin v. NJDEP and Township of Cranford Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3876-94T1 Panel affirms removal of lot from open space inventory based on assurance that it was intended for such purposes 7/22/96 P. 14.
GROUND WATER Reliance Insurance Co. v. Armstrong World Industries Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-703-93T3 DEP tells Appellate Division that groundwater is not owned by insured but is held in trust for all citizens 12/5/94 P.4, Opinion P. 6, brief P. 37.
GROUND WATER STANDARDS NJPDES New ground water standards will determine remedial action and apply to new or renewed NJPDES permits 2/6/93 P. 12a.
GROUNDWATER / STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) U.S. responds to private parties' CERCLA claims against EPA and Dept. of Navy over groundwater contamination 1/23/01 P. 5, answer P. 15.
GROUNDWATER Antionette Morrone v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2221-94T2 League asks appeals court to consider decision in Morrone: 'owned property' exclusion does not apply to groundwater 7/10/95 P. 9, opinion P. 46.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION Pittston Company et al. v. Allianz Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 90-3631 Federal judge agrees that policy coverage for groundwater contamination is not barred by owned property exclusion 9/4/95 P. 4, excerpts P. 49.
GROUNDWATER Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) U.S. says groundwater near Lakehurst will take
GROUNDWATER Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) Judge finds allegations of migration of contamination onto property is continuing tort that is not time barred 3/21/00 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
GROUNDWATER Reliance Insurance Co. v. Armstrong World Industries Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-703-93T3 Companies tell Appellate Div. that groundwater is not 'owned' but is 'property of state and its citizens' 12/5/94 P.4, Opinion P. 9, brief P. 50.
GROUNDWATER STANDARDS IMO the Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:9-6 Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3354-92T1 Appellate Div. bows to expertise of DEP for setting chlorobenzene and arsenic groundwater standards 10/10/94 P. 49, opinoin P. 31.
GROUNDWATER/ CERCLA Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) Magistrate judge says NJDEP cannot be sued as a de facto federal officer for concurring in 40-year Lakehurst remedy 10/24/00 P. 4, order P. 28. Amended complaint adding CERCLA claim against EPA for Lakehurst groundwateer contamination 11/27/00 P.9, complaint P. 33. Summon is issued for EPA based on CERCLA claims that agency capriciously concurred in Lakehurst remedy 12/12/00 P. 10
GROUNDWATER/ OWNED PROPERTY Reliance Insurance Co. v. Armstrong World Industries Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-703-93T3 Appellate Div. declares 'owned property' exclusion does not apply to contaminated groundwater under insured's property 7/22/96 P. 5, opinion P. 43.
GROUNDWATER/ STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) Magistrate judge says NJDEP cannot be sued as a de facto federal officer for concurring in 40-year Lakehurst remedy 10/24/00 P. 4, order P. 28.
GROUNDWATER/ STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS Heritage Minerals Inc. and Hovsons Inc. v. United States of America for U.S. Department of the Navy D NJ No. 99-83 (MLC) Judge denies reconsideration of U.S. argument that groundwater contamination is a permanent injury 5/9/00 P. 5, order P. 22.
GROUNDWATER/ VOLUNTARY REMEDIATION Robert E. Ohaus et al. v. Continental Casualty Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3616-93T3 Appellate Division says voluntarily assumed remediation of groundwater under insured's property may be covered 8/6/96 P. 7, opinion P. 23.
GUARANTY FUND McCandless Fuels Inc. v. Progressive Fuel Oil Inc. et al. Superior Court, Law Division Gloucester County No. C-107091 Judge allows McCandless Fuels to seek up to $300,000 despite Guaranty Association's duplicatation 6/25/01 P. 8, brief P. 41.
HABITAT / WETLAND Nisivoccia & Co.-v. NJDEP/ Land Use Regulation-OAL-No. ESA 9904-99----Shinn approves settlement in which DEP will allow-a subdivision map to be proposed for transition area-12/11/01 P. 12.
HABITAT IMO Letter of Interpretation to Englehardt Construction Co. No. 1922-91-0008.2 Commissioner rejects extended budder zone because of reported sighing of owl; suitable habitat is nearby 4/24/01 P. 11.
HABITAT IMO Stream Encoachment and Freshwater Wetlands Permits Nos. 1025-91-0005.4 etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1440-99T5 Panel affirms that presence of endangered turtles does not give nearby property owners particularized right to hearing 6/5/01 P. 7, opinion P. 18.
HAZARDOUS DISCHARGE SITE REMEDIATION Borough of Middlesex v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-733-96T1 Appellate Div. affirms denial of borough's application for funding for new PA/SI of contamination at landfill 1/5/98 P.9.
HAZARDOUS SITE FUND Sav-Cote Corp. v. NJDEP Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-626-96T2 Appellate Div. affirms rejection of hazardous site funds for failure to prove Sav-Cote was an 'innocent party' 8/5/97 P. 7, opinion P. 32.
HAZARDOUS SITES Report 1992 Site Remediation Report638 remediation protects listed in latest DEPE report; 545 are currently active; 47 were completed in 1992 1/11/93 P. 11.
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE/ WETLANDS NJDEP/Water and Hazardous Waste Enforcement v. Seagrave Coatings Corp./Vorac Co. OAL No. EHW 11317-94 Shinn finds expert's testimony is enough to affirm DEP's $55,000 penalty for hazardous discharge onto wetlands 1/20/98 P.12.
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE/ WETLANDS NJDEP/Water and Hazardous Waste Enforcement v. Seagrave Coatings Corp./Vorac Co. OAL No. EHW 11317-94 ALJ finds expert's testimony is enough to affirm DEP's $55,000 penalty for hazardous discharge onto wetlands plans 11/24/97 P. 11/24/97 P.7, brief P. 20.8, decision P. 34.
HAZARDOUS WASTE Department Environmental Protection, Bureau of Hazardous Waste Enforcement v. Vanco Inc. OAL No. EHW 2957-98 ALJ affirms $44,300 penalty against Vanco after finding it is large quantity generator of hazardous waste material 9/15/00 P. 4, decision P. 57.
HAZARDOUS WASTE Cotters Industries Inc. v. DEP OAL, No. EHW 09011-92N ALJ approves settlement of $50,000 penalty against bankrupt company for storing 300 containers of waste
HAZARDOUS WASTE Department Environmental Protection, Bureau of Hazardous Waste Enforcement v. Vanco Inc. OAL No. EHW 2957-98 Shinn adopts $44,300 penalty against Vanco after finding it is large quantity generator of
HAZARDOUS WASTE IMO the City of Linden for Withdrawal of the Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Commission Conditional Adoption of the GAF Chemicals Co. Inc. Site Designation Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-98-96T2 Appellate Div. hold shazardous waste facility meets need 3/23/98 P.6, opinion P. 12.
HAZARDOUS WASTE LANDFILL IMO Du Pont Chambers Works Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Modification for Landfill Expansion OAL No. EHW 8827-00 Shinn okays Du Pont's request for permit modification even without hearing to expand hazardous waste 4/24/01 P. 11.
HAZARDOUS WASTE NJDEP etc. v. Kuehne Chemical Co. Inc. OAL No. EEQ 3237-00 ALJ approves Kuehne Chemical's settlement of five orders among 16 for which company agrees to pay $23,900 penalty 3/6/1 P.9, decision P. 38.hazardous waste material 1/23/01 P. 6.
HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT NJDEP v. AlliedSgnal Inc. OAL No. EHW 11131-97 ALJ approves AlliedSignal agreement to reduce aisle space access conditions in hazardous waste permit
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES NJDEP Latest list of publicly funded hazardous waste cleanup projects in New Jersey 8/21/90 P. 10;
HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORTER REGISTRATION FEES American Trucking Associations Inc. et al. v. State of New Jersey Supreme Court No. 48,260 American Trucking Associations tells NJ Supreme Court USDOT ruling adopts its arguments on transporter fees 11/9/99 P.6, brief P. 46.
HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORTER REGISTRATION FEES American Trucking Associations Inc. et al. v. State of New Jersey Supreme Court No. 48,260 American Trucking Associations tells NJ Supreme Court USDOT ruling adopts its arguments on transporter fees 11/9/99 P.6, brief P. 46.
HEALTH IMO Passaic County Health Department CEHA Certification and Delegation of Authority Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-131-93T2 Appellate Div. says Passaic County health program is inconsistent with Paterson request to provide services 9/5/94 P. 9, opinion P. 29.
HISTORIC DISTRICT The Beattystown Community Council v. DEP, et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-5267-96T5 Appellate Div. says state development plan need not be considered in deciding applications, only in planning 6/23/98 P.13
HISTORIC/ TRANSITION AREA IMO JSM at New Dover LLC LURP Nos. 1205-97-00016 etc. Shinn denies hearing regarding use of historic site, saying Historic Preservation Office has recommended mitigations 10/24/01 P. 8, order P. 24.
HOST BENEFIT IMO Petition of Township of Mansfield for Solid Waste Ho Community Benefits Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2945-91T5 F Appellate Division upholds DEPE to review landfill host community 7/20/92 P. 7, opinon P. 53.
HOST COMMUNITY Town of Kearney v. Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-3885-00T2F Reversing, Appellate Div. says DEP has jurisdiction over 'host community benefit' payment for town's access road 10/10/01 P. 7, opinion P. 35.
HOST COMMUNITY In the Matter of the Petition of Township of Mansfield Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-735-97T1 Appellate Div. bars retroactive application to 1989 of '$1.53 per ton 'host community benefit' for town 4/25/00 P. 12.
IMMUNITY Lindenwold Associates v. Lindenwold Borough Municipal Utility Authoirty Appellate Divison of Superior Court No. A-3872-91T1 Appellate Division finds authority immune from damages for developer's loss due to threatened off-site costs 9/6/93 P.11, opinion P. 50.
IMO Grand Sanitation Service for Approval to Revise Tariff Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-004653-94T3 Appellate Division rejects argument that DEP's denial of higher rate and service area violates constitution 12/3/96 P. 12.
IMO Issuance of CAFRA Permit 0102-97-006.2: etc. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-1931-98T1 Appellate Div. says Trump is entitled to trial-type hearing on claim of unreasonable configuration of road and tunnel 1/27/00 P. 11.
INCINERATOR Air and Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Office, DEP v. Bayshore Regional Sewerage Authority OAL No. 2102-00 ALJ okays $15,000 penalty, says incinerator operator may not ignore reporting requirement by submitting other data 6/5/01 P. 12, decision P. 17.
INCINERATOR Air and Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Office, DEP v. Bayshore Regional Sewerage Authority OAL No. 2102-00 Shinn okays $15,000 penalty, says incinerator operator failed to provide notice of Air Pollution Act violations 9/20/01 P. 12, decision P. 32.
INCINERATOR ASH City of Scrantonand Borough of Taylor and Old Forge v. DER and Empire Sanitary Landfill, Permittee PA Environmental Hearing Board No. 94-060-E ALJ says Scranton, other towns waited too long to try to amend notice for Empire Landfill ash from NJ 6/6/95 P. 10b
INCINERATOR IMO Issuance of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit NO. 0901 D21 HP01 by DEP to ICI Americas Inc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4570-89T2 Appellate Div. says Environmental Impact Statement is needed for replacement incinerator as 'new facility' 8/10/92 P. 9, opinon P. 24.
INCINERATOR IMO Issuance ofSolid Waste FacilityPermit by DEP toUnion CountyUtilities AuthorityAppellate Division ofSuperior CourtNo. A-3444-89T2 DER properly issued Union County incinerator permi before hazardous waste disposal contract, panel rules 7/6/92 P. 9, opinon P. 30.
INCINERATORS/TAKING Milstone Township et al. v. Hazardous Waste Facilities NJ Supreme Court No. 30-419 U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge to siting of hazardous waste incinerators in NJ 11/7/89 P. 10;
INDEMINITY Chemical Leaman Tank Lines Inc. v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1543 Judge apportions indemnification to Chemical Leaman from London insurers under each policy during 10 years 10/7/97 P. 4, opinion P. 13.
INDEMNFICATION Madison Industries Inc. v. Polyfibre Associates Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-1345-9OT1 Appeal. Div. denies indemnification to Madison, finds property and conduct source of contamination 11/4/91 P. 6, opinion P. 24.
INDEMNIFICATION State of New York and the Town of Tusten v. SCA Services Inc. et al. S.D. NY No. 83 Civ. 6402 (RPP) Judge says transporter is liable for indemnification for drums removed from site in NJ and disposed of in NY 3/7/94 P. 13, opinion P. 42.
INDEMNIFICATION The Mennen Co. v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 93-5273 (WGB) Judge denies Mennen's attempt to compel insurer to implead another carrier for environmental claims 2/5/96 P. 14.
INDEMNIFICATION/ ATTORNEY'S FEES Bowen Engineering Inc. and Niro Atomizer Acquisitior Co. Inc. v. The Estate of Ralph T. Reeve 3rd Cir.U S.C.A. No. 93-5381 Estate tells 3rd Ci^L that indemnity contract requires attorney's fees to 'enforce' clause 9/6/93 P.12a
INDEMNITY General Accident Insurance v. State of New Jersey NJ Supreme Ct No. A-44-95 N.J. Supreme Court says RI/FS expenses may be defense costs 4/9/96 P. 4, Opinion P. 49. INDEMNITY/ CERCLA Beazer East Inc. v. The Mead Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-3372 3rd Circuit denies Mead petition to rehear ruling that agreement did not require buyer to indemnify seller 12/19/94 P. 9, briefs P. 41.
INDEMNITY/ CERCLA Beazer East Inc. v. The Mead Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-3372 3rd Cir. says agreement did not specify clear intention of site buyer to indemnify seller for CERCLA costs 9/5/94 P. 8, opinion P. 33.
INDEMNITY/ CERCLA Beazer East Inc. v. The Mead Corp. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-3372 Mead asks 3rd Cir. to rehear ruling that agreement did not specify buyer's intent to indemnify seller's CERCLA costs 11/7/94 P. 9.
INDEMNITY/ CERCLA Mead Corp. v. Beazer East Inc. U.S. Supreme Court No. 94-1414 Supreme Court denies Mead's petition to review ruling that agreement did not specify intent to indemnify seller 4/24/95 P. 13.
INDEMNITY/ CERCLA Mead Corp. v. Beazer East Inc. U.S. Supreme Court No. 94-1414 Supreme Court denies Mead's petition to review ruling that agreement did not specify intent to indemnify seller 4/24/95 P. 13.
INDEMNITY/ CONTRACT Eastern Industrial Corp. et al. v. Transtech Industries Corp. E.D. PA No. 92-2960 Judge says indemnification clause in stock purchase may have survived purchaser's later sale of company 2/22/93 P.6.
INDICTMENT Former operations manager at Kearny plant indicted for allegedly causing pollutant release 10/7/91 P. 13.
INDISPENSABLE PARTY UTI Corp. v. Fireman's Find Insurance Co. and American Insurance Co. D NJ No. 92-4703 (JBS) Judge says PA Guaranty Assn. is not an indispensable party in insurance action over underground storage tanks 9/4/95 P. 8, opinion P. 13. J udge allows statements of representatives of Penna. broker in UTI's insurance action over underground tanks 11/6/95 P. 9, opinion P. 11.
INDIVIDUAL CERCLA LIABILITY United States ofAmerica v. Benjamin Farber v. Purex Corp. et al.D NJNo. 86- 3736 Judge, saying that the 'reach of CERCLA is not unlimited', finds woman not individually liable 6/1/92 P. 6, brief P. 48.
INDIVIDUAL CONTROL STRATEGY Municipal Authority of the Borough of St. Marys v.U.S. EPA 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 91-3009 3rd Cir. says it lacks jurisdiction over appeal of PA-imposed individual control strategy 9/21/91 P. 13, opinion P. 29.
INDIVIDUAL LIABILITY OF OFFICERS NJDEP v. Engineered Precision Casting Co. et al. OAL No. EWR 1693-90 ALJ finds corpora~e officers can be individually liable for penalties for violating Water Pollution Control Act 7/22/91 P. 4, opinion P. 62.
INJUNCTION United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 3rd Circuit is asked if court has CERCLA jurisdiction to enjoin EPA action that is causing irreparable harm 8/2/93 P. 11.
INJUNCTION United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 Princeton Gamma-Tech criticizes U.S.'s arguments against judicial review of action precompletion 9/20/93 P. 10
INJUNCTION United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 NJPDES United States tells 3rd Circuit that district court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin EPA remediation actions at site 9/6/93 P.10.
INJUNCTION United States of America v. Princeton Gamma-Tech Inc. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 93-5252 U.S. tells 3rd Cir. that district court is proper forum for fact-finding on PGT's newly found documents 2/6/93 P. 8, brief P. 48.
INNOCENT PURCHASER Newhan Properties & Management Corp. v. State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection etc. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2915-95T1 Appellate Div. says buyer alerted by inspector to check into tank leakage cannot claim to be an innocent purchaser 5/21/97 P. 8, opinion P. 26.
INSECTICIDE William Bartolone v. Bonide Chemical Co. Inc. et al. Superior Court Atlantic County Law Division No. L-004003-93 Judge signs order following bench ruling that federal Insecticide Act preempts common law claims by user 4/4/94 P. 9, order P. 50.
INSECTICIDE William Bartolone v. Bonide Chemical Co. Inc., FMC Corp., Rohm and Haas Co. Uniroyal Chemical Co. Inc. et al. Superior Court Atlantic County Law Division No. L-004003-93 Judge says federal Insecticide Act preempts state failure to warn and common law claims by direct user 3/7/94 P. 7, brief P. 50.
INSECTICIDE William Bartolone v. Bonide Chmeical Co. Inc., FMC Corp., Rohm and Haas Co. Uniroyal Chemical Co. Inc. et al. Superior Court Atlantic County Law Division No. L-004003-93 Transcipt available of bench ruling which held federal Insecticide Act preempts common law claims by user 4/18/94 P. 12, transcript P. 47.
INSPECTION FEES NJDEP, Division of Hazardous Waste Enforcement v. Sheet Metal Products OAL No. EHW 03873-98 Sheet Metal agrees to $517.50 settlement of order for $2,070 penalty for failure to pay inspection fees 6/22/99 P. 12
INSPECTION FEES All County Environmental Services Inc.v. NJDEPE OAL No. EHW 860-91 ALJ orders $2,500 in penalties for non-payment of tank inspection fees in a timely manner 5/18/92 P. 10
INSPECTION FEES New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy v. Affiliated Manufacturers Inc. OAL No. EHW 5668-93 ALJ sees no authority for allowing DEPE to take into account companies' economic situation in setting fines 4/18/94 P. 7, opinion P. 42.
INSURANCE CPC International Inc. and Brodson Properties Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-1531-96T5 Appellate Div. finds standard for 'expected or intended' damage 11/25/99 P. 5, opinion P. 14
INSURANCE CPC International Inc. and Brodson Properties Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. et al. Appellate Division Of Superior Court No. A-1531-96T5 Appellate Div. finds standard for 'expected or intended' damage 11/25/99 P. 5, opinion P. 14
INSURANCE American Employers Insurance Co. et al. v. Elf Atochem North America Inc. et al. NJ Supreme Court No. A-190-97 Supreme Court says Insurance Guaranty Assn. is not liable for environmental claim by out-of-state business 4/6/99 P.9.
INSURANCE / CONTINUOUS TRIGGER Gottlieb, Leonard et al. v. Newark Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division, Superior Court No. A-2243-88T5 Appellate Division applies continuous trigger to suit with each new discovery of migration of pesticides 4/10/90 P. 8, opinion P. 21;
INSURANCE / COVERAGE Carter-Wallace seeks indemnification from insurers for $5.4-million share of Lone Pine consent decree 11/21/89 P. 15; text of complaint 1/23/90 P. 51.
INSURANCE / EXCLUSION Creighton , Jan. T. v. Petroleum Marketers Mutual Insurance Co. Inc. Superior Court, Mercer County No. L-89-0852 Knowledge of impairment but not of its source or magnitude enough to exclude coverage 1/9/90 P.6, opinion P. 39;
INSURANCE / NEW JERSEY LAW Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Triangle Industries Inc. et al. v Wausau Insurance Companies et al. W VA Supreme Court No. CC999 New Jersey law is applied by W VA Supreme Court to policies covering contamination in other states 3/20/90 P. 7, opinion P. 29;
INSURANCE / OCCURRENCE Du-Wel Products v. United States Fire Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division Superior Court No. A-4457-87T2 Panel holds coverage of prolonged, unintended pollution is not barred by "occurrence" and "pollution exclusion" 12/5/89 P. 9, opinion P. 34;
INSURANCE / TRIGGER Owens-Illinois v. United Insurance Co. et al. Middlesex County Superior Court No. C-5045-84 Judge applies Keene theory to Owens-Illinois' policy for personal injury and building claims 4/24/90 P. 5, Owens-Illinois' reply brief P. 13;
INSURANCE Allied Corp. v.James V. Frola et al.D NJ No. 87-462 Judge declares lessee's insurers are not obligated to provide coverage for cleanup in Edgewater Park 11/9/92 P. 12.
INSURANCE Allied-Signal Inc. and UOP Inc. v. Abeille-Paix Reassurances et all Morris County Superior Court, No. MRS L-226-88 Allied-Signal and Travelers settle insurance coverage for cleanup of more than 250 sites 9/25/90 P. 12;
INSURANCE American Employers' Insurance Co. et al. v. Elf Atochem North America Inc. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-2001-94T1F etc. Panel directs court to issue injunction barring parallel insurance litigation in Texas over 66 sites in 19 states 4/24/95 P. 10.
INSURANCE Armotek Industries Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau N NJ No. 88-3110 (CSF) Judge says Wausau is not liable fro NJ company's cleanup costs in CT under policy negotiated in PA 11/23/90 P. 7. opinion P. 50;
INSURANCE Associated Electric & Gas Insurance Services Ltd. et al. v. National Surety Corp. v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 On rehearing, 3rd Cir. again finds notification delay bars recovery by Texas Eastern for PCB contamination 1/24/94 P. 9, opinion P. 48.
INSURANCE Carpenter Technolgy Corp. v. Admiral Insurnace Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-671-99T1 Appellate Div. remands environmental coverage dispute to determine amount of credit which is due NJPLIGA 12/28/00 P.14, opinion P. 26.
INSURANCE Carpenter Technology Corp. v. Admiral Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-0045-95T5 Panel affirms liability of association for unpaid claims against Carpenter Technology by insolvent insurer
INSURANCE Chemical Leaman Tank Lines Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al. D NJ No. 89-1543 (SSB) Jury finds Chemical Leaman is entitled to indemnity from insurers for soil and groundwater contamination 4/19/93 P. 4, order P.48.
INSURANCE Chemical Leaman Tank Lines Inc. v. The Aetna Casualty & Surety Robin Anthony Gildart Jackson etc. D NJ No. 89-1543 (SSB) Judge declines to accept policy amendment, fo d seven years after stipulation, al tor iltsurerÕs share of coverage 11/9/99 P. 7, opinion P. 23.
INSURANCE Chemical Leaman Tank Lines Inc. v.The Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al.D NJNo. 89-1543 (SSB)Judge holds NJ law applies to Chemical Leaman terminal for insurance policies negotiated in PA 4/20/92 P. 9, opinion P. 72.
INSURANCE CHOICE OF LAW Transamerica Insurance Co. v. Thomas M. Durkin & Sons Inc. et al.3rd Cir. U.S.C.A.No. 92-1018Durkin tells 3rd Circuit that PA's interests must yield to NJ's 'more substantial interest' in cleanup coverage 4/6/92 P. 10.
INSURANCE CIBA-Geigy Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. et al. Superior Court Law Division Union County No. 97515-87 Judge says contamination of site by CIBA-Geigy was done 'innocently', all insurers must pay for cleanup 2/17/98 P.9.
INSURANCE COVERAGE CPS Chemical Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co. Appellate Div., Superior Court No. A-1694-89T3 Panel finds CPS Chemical had no coverage for environmental claims, defense costs 10/9/90 P. 5, opinion P. 18; Appellate Division calls expert's opinion 'bare conclusions unsupported by factual evidence' 10/23/90 P. 4, opinion P. 12;
INSURANCE COVERAGE Hoffman-LaRoche Inc. v. The Hartford Group Essex County Superior Court No. W-015519-87 Judge holds Hartford obligated for costs, fees and expenses in connection with Price's Pit action 2/5/90 P. 12, opinion P. 66;
INSURANCE COVERAGE Leksi Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co. et al. D NJ No. 88-4123 Leksi settlement conference scheduled Aug. 10 8/7/90 P. 11;
INSURANCE COVERAGE Metex Corp. v. Federal Insurance Co. et al. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-6689-94T5 Appellate Div. remands case for determination of whether excess insurers are liable for cleanup that is not mandated 5/21/96 P. 11, opinion P. 40.
INSURANCE CPS Chemical Company Inc. v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. and The Continental Insurance Co. Appellate Division of Superior Court No. A-4228-92T2 Panel affirms jury verdict against CPS Chemical, finds no abuse in giving 'false in one, false in all' instruction 6/6/95 P. 9, opinon P. 13.
INSURANCE DEFENSE George H. Sands and Jeffrey H. Sands v. Cigna Property and Casualty Insurance Co. et al. Appellat e Division of Superior Court No. 2848-94T3 Insurance carriers owe defense to property owners, who are innocent landowners, Appellate Div. rules 7/10/95 P. 6, opinion P. 34.
INSURANCE DISCOVERY Frederick V. Dexter Jr. et al. v. Cosan Chemical Corp. et al. D NJ No. 91-5436 (DRD) Judge orders North River Insurance to produce policies sought by Cosan Chemical in insurance coverage dispute radius 11/7/00 P.8, opinion P. 35.
INSURANCE Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Crown Corp & Seal Co. Inc. et al. 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 89-1648 3rd Circuit remands environmental insurance case to determine threshold subject matter jurisdiction 7/10/90 P. 10, opinion P. 53;
INSURANCE Gilbert Spruance Co. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association Insurance Co. et al. New Jersey Supreme Court A-59 Sept. Term 1992 NJ Supreme Court applies NJ law when parties can reasonably foresee waste will be deposited at NJ site 8/2/93 P. 5.
INSURANCE Harleysville Mutual Insurance Co. Inc. v. Sussex County, Delaware 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 94-7011 3rd Cir. says EPA notice does not constitute 'lawsuit' that triggers insurers' duty to defend county in Delaware 1/23/95 P. 8, opinion P. 27.
INSURANCE Hatco Corp. v.W.R.Grace & Co.-Conn. etc.D NJ No. 89 Judge says insurers can be held jointly and severally liable for all continuous contamination at Hatco site 9/21/92 P. 4 opinion P. 44.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 Supreme Court refuses to review decision that applied federal jurisdiction in PA to 'foreign state' insurer case 11/7/94 P. 14.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 Texas Eastern's insurers tell 3rd Circuit that rehearing is unwarranted since PCB decision is not inconsistent 7/19/93 P. 7.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 .In Re Texas Eastern asks 3rd Circuit for reconsideration of jurisdiction ruling in $750-million PCs appeal 6/21/93 P. 6.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 3rd Cir. allows no recovery for Texas Eastern because of its delay in notifying insurers of PCB contamination 6/7/93 P. 4, opinion P. 10.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 3rd Cir. refuses to rehear decision that applies federal jurisdiction in PA in case of 'foreign state' insurer 2/21/94 P. 8, brief P. 38.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir. U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 Texas Eastern seeks 3rd Circuit hearing in banc on opinion that allowed federal jurisdiction in PCB cases 2/7/94 P. 8.
INSURANCE In Re Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage Litigation 3rd Cir U.S.C.A. No. 92-1638 Insurers tell 3rd Cir. that Texas Eastern's application for certification to Texas Supreme Court lacks reasons 10/19/92 P. 5.
INSURANCE J & J Metals Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Continental Casualty Co. D NJ No. 95-5976 (AJL) Federal judge dismisses environmental coverage suit to allow resolution of similar claims in Superior Court 5/6/96 P.10.
INSURANCE Jack Friedlan et al. v. Prudential Reinsurance Co. et al. Appellate Division No. A-1914-94T3 Panel says owners are not entitled to coverage because tenants, not owners are insured in excess policies. 10/21/96 P. 13.
INSURANCE 'KNOWN LOSS' Rohm and Haas Co. et al. v. Continental Casualty et al. PA Superior Court: 670 PHIL 98 Rohm & Haas says opinion vacating $21-million award sets new rule for what constitutes fraud and 'known loss' in PA 6/22/99 P. 9.
INSURANCE Morton InternationalInc. v. GeneralAccident InsuranceCo. et al.NJ Supreme CourtC-629 Sept. Term 199134,341 Insurers seek to expand record in Morton appeal to Supreme Court involving 'pollution exclusion' 8/24/92 P. 9.
INSURANCE Nestle Feed Corp. v. Aetna Casualty Corp. D. NJ No. 89-1701 (CSF) Judge orders Liberty Mutual to produce claims data on other insureds' in Nestle Lone Pine case 12/24/90 P. 5, opinion P. 12;
INSURANCE Nestle Foods Corp. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. DF NJ No. 89-1701