Search Site
Menu
Homeowner Fails to Conduct Due Diligence; Found Liable for Environmental Cleanup

In a wake-up call for the residential property market, on September 28, 2012, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court  found that a residential property owner with a leaking underground storage tank that was “closed” before he purchased the property was liable for cleanup costs because he failed to conduct a due diligence inquiry prior to the purchase.

In State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Timothy Shea, No. A-4124-10T1 (N.J. App. Div. Sept. 28, 2012), the facts showed that Shea owned property next to State Farm’s policy holder, Kimberly Rossi. Shea never did an environmental assessment of the property before he bought his home and he never used oil heat.  What Shea did not know is that an abandoned tank on his property had leaked, and migrated onto Rossi’s neighboring property (which also had its own leaking UST).  State Farm paid for the cleanup costs and then sued Shea to recover them. Shea’s response, among others, was that he never used the tank, and should not be held liable for the cleanup costs.

A trial court found that Shea might have avoided liability altogether under the innocent purchaser defense of the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act (“Spill Act”) had he performed a sufficient environmental assessment before purchasing his property.  But, Shea admitted that he had not engaged in any kind of environment assessment before the purchase and therefore could not benefit from the innocent purchaser defense.  Thus, Shea was liable to Rossi for the damage from the leaking tank, even though Shea never used the tank in question.  Shea argued that, as required by the State Supreme Court’s recent decision in NJDEP v. Dimant, the lower court did not address whether the leak occurred during his period of ownership of the property.  The Appellate Division noted that Dimant concerned the plaintiff’s lack of evidence proving a connection between the contamination and the suspected source.  Here, there was no factual dispute that the UST was leaking while Shea owned the property.

This case demonstrates that environment assessments are not just appropriate for commercial property–where environmental due diligence assessment area commonplace.  In the case of both residential and commercial/industrial property, an owner may avoid cleanup liability if some measure of environmental due diligence is conducted before the purchase.  The amount of protection available and the nature of the assessment that must be undertaken may vary based on the circumstances. It appears that, at a minimum, a preliminary assessment should be conducted in accordance with the Spill Act requirements. More evaluation may also be required depending on the results of the preliminary assessment.

Importantly, a residential property purchaser is not required to undertake such an environmental analysis.  But if he or she fails to do so, then the property owner is at the risk of losing an innocent purchaser defense that might have been available had the investigation been performed.  Without such a defense, a residential property owner can face considerable environmental remediation costs.  For example, the attorneys at Lieberman Blecher & Sinkevich have been assisting residential property owners with underground storage tank leaks for over a decade, and we have seen UST cleanups run from as little at $20,000 to well over $1 million.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Our Attorneys

Recent Twitter Posts

  • New Jersey Legislature Passes National Precedent Setting Environmental Justice Bill. https://t.co/P8ybU2UrtD
    4 weeks ago
  • New Jersey files 12 new environmental justice lawsuits. https://t.co/jYo1yCwTOa
    4 weeks ago
  • Plans Underway for Building Offshore Wind Farms Along the New Jersey Coast. https://t.co/S4CDX5DMS0
    2 months ago
  • Energy companies cancel construction of Atlantic Coast Pipeline. https://t.co/aDYHr4nhal
    3 months ago

Recent Blog Posts

Lead Exposure and Frivolous Litigation

Owners of older residential properties are likely familiar with the legal requirement to provide warnings concerning the existence of lead. Lead exposure, particularly amongst children, can result in severe, even
Read More
Lead Exposure and Frivolous Litigation

New Jersey Supreme Court rules the PLA does not preempt CFA claims by consumers

Now more than ever, consumer protection is important. As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, we see new products on our shelves, promising safe disinfection for hands and surfaces as
Read More
New Jersey Supreme Court rules the PLA does not preempt CFA claims by consumers

Notices and Appellate Review of a CAFRA Permit

In JSTAR, LLC v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, et al., Docket No. A-1745-18T1, the Appellate Division in an unpublished decision revisited the issues of notice and a review
Read More
Notices and Appellate Review of a CAFRA Permit

Preemption Isn’t Always the Answer: The Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division highlights the necessary harmony between State legislation and municipal land use ordinances

On November 20, 2019, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division, issued an opinion in the matter captioned Lakeview Memorial Park Association v. Burlington County Construction Board
Read More
Preemption Isn’t Always the Answer: The Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division highlights the necessary harmony between State legislation and municipal land use ordinances

In the media

  • Gulf Coast Town Center facing foreclosure

    Naples Daily News, September 16, 2015

    Wells Fargo filed a lawsuit Sept. 8 against an affiliate of CBL & Associates, the owners of the decadeold, 1.2 million-square-foot mall in south Fort Myers for a $190.9 million unpaid loan. The center has 94 stores on 204 acres, with such anchors as Super Target, Belk, Best Buy, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Marshalls and Costco...

    Read More
  • Town liable for private company's leaking underground tanks, court rules

    NJ.com Jul 26, 2017

    CRANFORD -- A couple that owned a businesses in town and became sick from leaking underground tanks owned by an adjacent business can sue the township for damages because the tanks were partially ...

    Read More
  • Dark Waters: How a Class Action Catapulted NJ to Forefront of 'Forever Chemicals' Battle

    NJ Law Journal Jan 09, 2020

    As property owners become increasingly aware of PFAS contamination, and as individuals exposed to PFAS learn of the health risks associated with exposure, liability will likely affect entire supply chains.

    Read More
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
Contact Our Firm

Quick Contact Form