.i ~ r,, ~. 2~:~ 19 9:2~:~AM

N~= , 16 6

:i u~:lr.~ HA~'~~EU~Y

F', 1 '1 1

PRF~ARED ~3Y THE CULT:
SUP~~2IU~ COCJRT OF NE'V'V' JERSEX
ClI~NCER~ 1)Y`~SION
S~C.7SSEX COUNT'Y~

STAT + OF 1VEW J~;~tSEY,
D~l'A~T'N1~NT Off'
EN'V"1:R0~'V~ENTA.L
PROTECTrON,
Pl~intif~',

DOCI~T NO. SSX-C-7-x9
v.

~~'~
JOSEPI~ VV`AY.LAC~ and

~,~v~ w~~,~cE,

JUN ~~ zD19

CAVIL AC~rYON
ODDER

pefe~nd~uts.

Matttze Berdate Byme,P.J.Ch.

- .
THIS 1VIATT~R comes Ue#'nre the court vy ~vay of Order to Sl~ovc~ Cause filed by ICe~vin
Jersey,
J, Fleming, Esq. az~:d Mathew ll. I~~.oblauch, Esq., cou1.lse1 for ,plaintiff State of New
]~epaz~a?1ent of ~nvirol~n~ental protection (`L~JD~I'''), and i~o opposition having been filed by
7effiey M. Patti, Esq.,, coiulsel, fug c~eferidants Joseph and ~.~.ura Wallace ("c~efend~i~ts"), and. the
co~~rt tiaviug read old considered tla,e pl~~d:ings filed, end for the reaso~as set forth in the attached.
statement of reas~ias, and for good cause ~.h wn;
l
Y'T IS O~ TI~YS~~~ DAY U~'JC1N~ ZOl.9 ORD~

+'~? ~s ~'o1lo~vvs:

1. Plaintiffs rec~viest.for a. prelirnit~azy injt~tietion wit}.~ restraints as st~teci YY1 its Order to ~1ao~~v
Cause fleci on Fe~iliary 22,, 2019 is GR.AI~T7'~n.
2. Defer~dt~.lts sha11 cease receiving any aald all fill material and/or solid waste onto the
property ~t Block 13U, Lot ],~5, ~~SO ~IlO~VIl ~S 3 S11V~i SpIl1Ce Dr1'V~E,'V'e~non, Ne1~~ rersey
)
(the "property,
3. Defend~rlts shall provide access to N:TD~P and/or ancii~viduals on be}z~1f of N`J~l~EP to
delineate the area of dist:~u~bat~ee and eh,tent of the fill ~z~ateria.l ~brott~~f oj1to the property,
to perform any s:~l~zpling of the matei-i~1 on the ~rol~el`ty, and/or per~o1-i1z and other
ins~~ecfiu~is of the propez~y as I~TJDEP deez~?~ necessary to dete~nzin~ com~li~z~.ce with the
Solid Waste Management Act, the'VV~ater Po~lutiorl Control Act, and the ~~i~}.~lantis Water
Protec~ioJ~ and Plai~rung Act'.

Page X of 11

 _~ L: fl ,

~, 2 I) 1 ~

J ~ L ~ A~

I Ll ~:_~ r, c

N ~_~ . 16 ~~ 6

H A ~ ~J E~~ ~ ~l ~

F~. 2;-i 1 1

4. 'Within tell (10) days, defend~~ts s~ia11 prc~v~de N'~EP with. hill ~nci coi~aplete
documentation setting forth the sow-ce and nature ofthe Ynat~;ria1 brot~~lt onto the site si~~ce
2009, including but not luniteci to ill an~lytiaal results, rEceipts, bil).~s of Ia.cl:in~, and
idez~tificatic~t~ of a.11 tr~t~sj~ot~ing haulers.
5. Within si.~ty(60)clays., c~efet~.dants shall ch~r~cterize all fill 111ate1~.a1 to deteiniine i~it nl~ets
the defnutioiZ of solid waste as defined u1 N.J,A_C. 7:26-1.~ ~i~.d provide NJDEP an
estimate for the cost of removal oft~le solid waste.
6. Wztl~in, one-htincired ~~~d twenty(120) c~~ys, defendants s~1~11 remove and properly dispose
of all f`i.l:l -~Zat.~ria.l which i~~.eets the definitio~Z of soli. waste ~Ta: t1~e propel-ty.
7. ~it~vn sixty (60) days, defend~nt~ shall dace su~~icie~t funds into escro~uv or all attorney
ht~~st accotult to gL~arantee a.d.egt~atie :f~lnds for removal ofthe solid ~vasCe on the property.
b. Wzthin sixty(60) days, defendants shall sL~~mit ~d implezazent ~ soil erosion,~d sediineut
contl-o~ plan for the p3ope ~ty an.cl apply fir ~ SG3 stoim~vater pet~~.ut.

Pale 2 0~'1.1

 .l ~ n. ~, 2~:i 1~ 9; 21A~I1

N~:. 16 6

:i u~:~r,~ HAN;~~EURY

F'. ~~ 1 1

Stateu~,ent of Reasons
SSA-C-7-19
State of New Hersey, Dep~rtinent of En~riroluneii:fiG'~1 Protect1o11 v. Wallace et ~1:.
This actioxl iY1~vo~ves ~ ci~spt~t~ between ~l~intiff, the St~~e of I~ew Jersey, ]~epa1-tn~.ent of
Enviroi~nlenfa:l protectio11 ("I~~DEP"), anal. defendants, Joseph Wallace and T~atua VV~II~~e
as 3
("defendants"), ov~mets of ~e~1 pro~el-~y located at Block 13U, ~.ot 1.05, co1~~l~only kiao~vri
"). Pl~~ltiff
Silvei Spruce Drive, Vernon To~ns~lip, Susses Co~uriiy, Nevin Jersey (the "property
filed a. Con~plait~t a1~d Oxder to Show Cause otl ~ebru~ry 22, 2019 alleging ~lefend~~ts continue

to

opc;rate an ui17~e~~zitted solid ~v~ast~ inanagei~a:ent. facility o~~ their pt~operty i~1 vYolation o~~Ile Solid
fo: (i)
Waste M~:nagenie~1t.Act ("SWMA") and r~~uestin~ the court compel defetid~nts
immec~i~tely cease reeeiv~ing fill arl~i solid waste m~~ert~a1 on the propel~~;(ii) i~rllnediately

provide

N~J'I~Ep access to the property to perform. necessary inspections and sa~~lpling ofthe property;(iii)
(iv)
tivYt~iir~ ten days, ~ro~vic~e NTD~P with documentation of p~teiztial solid waste on the pro~~e~~y;
~~e
within thirty days, characterize X11 ~i11 mateilal, on tale prope1~[y to detet-~~~ ne if it meet's
defitutioi~ ofsolid vtii~ste and. provide ~tJD~p an estiz►~ate for the cost of removal; (~v~) within foi~Cy=
of the solid
five days, place sufficient f, unds in an es~.row or trust ~ccoutit. to ~ii.ai~ntee removal.
X11 solid
~i~.ste from tl~e ~~roperty; anc~ (vi) within nirae~y days, ren~.ove and pro~~ezl,~ dispose of
waste. Conl~l~snt, Count One.
01~ March 1, 20 9, ~1~e court dela.zed pl~~intif.~s zequest for e1~f~~y of an Order to Show Cause
on the
based osi plairtltift's failure to ~~~o~e, by clea~~ ~-inc~ convincing evidence, Yt ~vo~uld succeed
IT1eI1tS Of 1tS CIa.lI11S.

However, t}~.e parties entered into a. consent. Orcl.er coz~sertlting to enfi,y of

para~aphs ~i, ~b, and e of t~~e Order to Shoi~v Cause, conipellillg ciefendailts .~osepl~ ~7Vallace and
~.aL~a Wallace to act as follows:

Page 3 cif 11

 _lun. ~, 2~:~ 19 9;22AM

~~_~. 16 6

i u~:lr,~ HAfV~~EURV

F', 4i'1 1

(a) Ymmedi~tely cease receiving a11y and all fill nl~terial and/or solid ~,vaste :o11to
the property at Block 130, ~,ot 1.(~5, also known. as 3 Silver Spruce Drive,
Vernon, Ne~vv Hersey (tlze "site");
(b) I~~~ediately ~~1:ovide access to N~~~P and/or individu~Is ors behalf of tie
Depai~1ent to delrne~te the azea of clisturb~nce and. extent o,f the fill m~te~~al
brotzg~lt. onto the site, to pel~oi~1~. a1iy sarriplitlg of the material. on site, all(~IOr
pei~foi~~~ airy other inspections of the pro~pei-~y as the Dep~rtn~ent. c~.eein.~
Y~ecessai-y to determine compliance ~vit~i the SWMA, ttie `~atez Pollution
Control Act, and the ~igh~ands VV'ater Protection and P~an-~~inb Act;
(e) Witk~i~1 thirty(3U) C1~ys ofthis older, provide N,TDEp wit~l f~ul~ and complete
d.oe~7~e~~tation setting forth the sou~:ce anc( natu.ze of the material brought onto
the site sanc~ 2009, in~ltlding but not 1:lmited. to all ~al~tical results, receipts,
bills ofl~di~zg, and.ident~ficatiun of X11 tir~1spot~ting l~~ulers.
Ori April S, 201 y, I~r~E~' ~-ene~wed its ~~~~lication for ei~iry of all piovisiorls included in its initial
Febr~iary 22, 201.9 Orcler t~ Sl~o~~v C~.use, lased on soil testing it pei~o~-nied on t11e ~~i~o~erty on
11~~~.~clz 14, 2019 in ~ccorclance wi z the 1Vlarch 1:, 2019 COI15eI~lt OrC1eI. This soil testing re~i~ealecl
soil cont~n~ir~~nts in excess of t11e NJDEP's residen.txal soil stand~i-ds.
Relevant F~~cl:s
I'efenda~~,ts' itivolven~.ent ~vvith NJDE~ dates back to 2U 14 anc~ il~cltldes com~~l.~i~zts about
ongoing violations on clefenciailts' property fion~ ~~ri~vat.e citizens, Vernon Toi~vn.s~ip offici:al:s, mod.
other ent~tYes. Compl~i~~~ ¶'~ 9, 11. A, tip to N~J~1~E~''s hotline on July 23,, 2~1~ 1~esulted i1i a site
inspection off' the ~ropei~y~ on August b, 2014. Ici. Rajetldra. Gand~~i ("Mr. Gandhi''), an
eilvir-onnlenta.l eaag n~er with tlZe Bureau. of So7.rc~ ~1V~aste Compliance end Enforcement, Was pat-t
of the I~TJ.DEp teaul t~~~t cotiducteci this ins;pectioi~. Certific:~tiortl of ~~tenciz~~ Garid.hi ("G:~ladhi
Cent.") ~~~ 1, 4, bu:rin~ this inspection, Mr_ G~atid.hi certifies the te~~1 obset-ved aiZ ``area. of fill
inatert-ial, o~n tivl~~.ch t~Ze~e was ~ I~rg~ sideslo~e of fill ~materz~l t~lat cont~~i.~led large alno~nt of soil
fluxed with concrete, 5~011~~

bIIC~i, ~~o~d, plastic, a17d

asphalt pieces." rd. ¶ ~. ~vLrt. G~:tidlu certifies

the "fill nl~terial was placed on the dotiv~~slope area oft1~e VV~allace ~~i-o~~rty so that i1 filled a. valley

Page ~t of Il.

 _~ ~n, ~, 2~i 1~ 9:22~M

N~::. 16 6

:i u~:lr, HAN`~EU~Y

at t11e boundai~y~ ~f his property." rd. Ivlr. G~a:nc~hi i.z~dicates tl~e inspection team

F'. ~; 1 1

"deteizl1inecl. there

or to ileeessit~te
was mot enough ev1dence to conclude t~1at. the fill material was solid. waste
~v~tnitlg Iette to
sampling of the inatez:ia.l." rd.. ¶ ~ ~ Follo~vil~~ the inspect~o~~, I~J~bEP issued a
defendants on. J~l~uary 14, 201 ~ to f~~cilitate fiztlire co1npliance. Id. ~( 6. Mr. G~ticlhi
personally visited l ie property approximately ten times between August.2014

ce~fiifies he his

and I~ecembet.- 2018
~tztion related to

rind cei-ti~ies defendants have con,~i~tent:Iy failed to provide tl~e ~e~uested doculnei
't11.e cl~a:t~liness oftfie fill 1n~t.erial. Id. ¶ 7.

b~~siness
O~ or about May 18,2 18,N~~nEP received a complaint fion1 Vernon'~o~vvriship's
Thomas F~7:~:e11
acl:mitusta-ator, Chailes Voelker, xelatecl. to c~ef~ncl~tlts' pzoperty. Cerkific~.tion af~
("Fat~ell Cei.-1,") ~ S. ~1 May 2018, defendants' neighbor a.ls~~ n1ade a. complaint about
pro~~ert~ that contained photogza~hs shotiving fhe exCent. of tTie fill ~~~~teria.l

defendants'

located. on t~~e ~~ropei-ty

to the N~`w~ Yor~C
from ail aerial vantage point. Imo. ¶ 6, ems. A..An additional citizen complaint made
ad~ertisem.ents
Department of ~nvironrnenta.l Conservation. produced se~eenshots o~ Crai~slist
zts'•propel~ty at"3 silver

ix~'viting trued drivers to move material from a."dumb facility" to c~efend~

spruce drive Sussex nj." 1d. ¶ ~,ex.}3. Additionally, ciefeildants I~~ec~ guiliyt~ sr~

counts ~~un.lawful
m~.tely 1,,000

ciispos~l ofsolid v~r~ste in SeptemUer 2017 as a result of p~u~ortedly dlin~ping a~~proxi
t.~ilckloacis of const~t~ction and del~iolition debris in ~arwic~.,I~ew Yoa:~.

rd. ~( 8, ems. C.

Vernon in
Legal action was p1'e~iously initiated ag~iz~st clefend~t~ts by the To~v~islup o.f
relafiozl to alleged violations o~'the Soil Ezosion and Sedinle~nt Coi1trol Act

.,T,S.A. 4:24-39 to -

on defe~ldatits ~lleged~
55~). This action, filed tinder docket nu:mbez SSA-C-2~-18, was based
disttubing an area. in excess of 5,000 square feet w t~lout a soil: erosion end
Com~~.l4+int 1( 16. Thy Susse,~. CO~lIl~

seclitnellt contiol flan.

011 CQI1velSiit~011 ~15t11Ct 1SS11.eC~ ~ StO~I ~VOTk O]'der

on

n~.aterial" onto tli,eir
August ~ 4, 2014, prohibiting de~e~ld~tits from "itn~orting any additional f11

Page 5 of 11

 _I L~ 1~ ~

j. 2 I J

I l

/ ~ L J~ ` I,I

''+ '~- ~

H i~ I V I\' E'' U I\ I

L~ '_! r, ~

propel~5% ``utltil such tine as a Soil Erosion end Sediment Co.lt~ol plan has

I V J V

~~ ~

V r~/~

been subin~,~EC~. t0 ~I1C~

of ~icharc~ T. Paull
certified Uy the l5usseh. Co~~tnty Soil Conserv~.tio~1 District]." Ceztifica.tloi~.
in Supei•i:or Cout-~ as the
("Pa~uI1 Cert.") ¶ I4. Vei~lo~l Townsh.i.~ sought il~jtulctive relied'
miuii.cipality empov►i~ered to

eIlf010E

the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Act' ~L~rsu.ant l'o

I~.~.S.A. x:24-53. rd. ¶ ~ 6.
zestra:inu~g Order
The Superior Colu-t deniecl 'Vei~loi~: To~v~nship's request foi ~ tenlporaiy
3I1C~. .~ ~~]'2I1I111t1a1~ li7~Lll1CtI011,

reasoning the Stop Work Order applied o~~l.~ to ~ p~~fii:ct~lar 5,000

squ~e foot' area rather t)ze entire parcel of lend. Id. ¶ 17. As a c~~1:sequence
a seconcl Stop Work Order ~ovas issued against clefend~~~t~ "with more

o~fhE coul-t's decision,

e:~plicit laza:guage indicting

co~ut.'s May 8, 2019 Order,
~~h~t actions ~iTal~~ce vas pro)~:iUited fiotn t~cing." 7d. ¶ ~ S, Per the
witaa.out. prejudice anci. the
the m~fte~ filed t~.ldeZ~ doc~:et nur~ZUer SSX~C-2018 tivas cii.sn~issed
TOWI1SIllp O;f V~~~IOI] 17V~~s

~1
granted leave to file tb.e claims pre~i~ously raise~i ~t~.d any additio~

c;1.aiYns peiTnitted b~ law or egtlit.~ in this action.
I~'J~EP's ~~~~~lication in. the instant action stems. fzo.nZ a report made to

NJDFP on J"~nu~ry

I' some of defei?dants' fill

31, 2019 b~~ one of de~enclants' neighbors. This ~aeighbor advised l~~DE

at 1 SzX'var Spruce DY7ve.
z~~aterial hid spilled across the ~topei-ty line onf~ his propez-ty located
N71~~,1' pez~;~lission to water
Cej:~i.ficatioll ~~~ Da~v~icl. On~~~ro ("Ongaro Cent.") '~( 5. T1.~:e or~vtier give
("~Vfr. Ongaro"), a I~TrDEP
his property and s~1~z~1~ the rele~v~ant materi.~s. 7d. David (~ng~o
sample fion~ fill matei~~l located
e1l~vironnlezltal specialist, ~vvas cl:isp~.tc]~ed to the site and took ~
with the nl~terial at the top
"at the base of ~1 a~pioximately 50-food high pole o~ fill material,
being tl~e most recez~t." 7d. ~~ 7. Mr. ~rigaro states "[the nlatezi~l-~ was the

same color, composition,

~rop~rty and ~tat.es he
~nc1 consistency of tl~e ltlountain of dill rriaterial" observed on defendants'
~~.lgaro states he collected tti~vo
is "certain t.l~at the moulltai~~.i~ is where it carne fiot~l," 7d. Mt:

Pate 6 of 1X

 L! Il ,

J, 2~...~ ~ ~

% , ZJAIVI

HA~~>~'U~~
,
I Ll ': ~ ,'-':

F,

~'" ~UJU

~;

s~l~.ples from the ~.~1 materiel froze a total of "t~velv~~ to fifteen fiozen chunl~~ (that1 ha.d rolled
~.ppro~in~~tely five feeC from ttie pr~pea~y line of the Wa11~~ce property ~t twee 1~e~tioY~s." 7d. Ml~.
Ongaro states Sze sent these samples for testing and received results indic~t.iY1g one of tla:e samples
contai~~.ecl "concent~-ations of of least t:wo cont~izli~~nts that exceed the residential c~it~ect contact.
soil remec~iation standai:ds as set forth z~~ N.1~.A.C. 7:26I~_" Ycl.'~(10, ex..A.. Pursuant ~o these results,
on February 20, 2019, NJDF~ iss~uecl two notices of viol~ti.orl to clefendan~s for violatitlg N.~.A.C._
x:26-2.~(~,one ilot7ce for oper3tslag an unlicensed solid waste f;~cility and one notice foz fail~u-e

to

permit entry to NJ~I~EP i~pectors. Coiz~~~l~int ~~ 7.
Pr•eli~ninccrvIn~unction
I~JrDEP ~i~g~~es it ~is entitled to injunctive xelief putsuaiat to d~fenc~.ants' stat:«t.o~y violations
and general equitable ~t~inci~les. Bi-i.e1'in Su.~port o~ Plaintiffls V~j-ifiect Compl~.Ynt aril Order t~
Show C.~`~se("Supp. Bri.ef') at.10-17. NJDEP c1~:ims case law indicates i~~reparable 1~~~-~~1 does not
statute.
need to ~be sllow~~ with respect to injunctive zelief w~ien such, an injunction ,s authorized Uy
32$,
M~t'~~~var~ ~eg'1 Teachers Assoc'z~: v'. Mataw~.n-A:I~erdeen Reg'l. Bd. of ~c~l~c., 212 N~.J~. Su ear.
(C~i.
334-35 (Law. l~iv. J:9~f) (citing Ho:fifr~ian v. CT~rci~rtl State ~a1~ns, ~6 N~.J~. 5u~,~e~-_ 1 S9, 201
Div. 1962)). Sapp. brief. at 1U-11. NDJFP states their s~npling of fill .material froi~~, defendants'
~~~operty demo.~strates they aTe

(~p~I'~t1I1~T

an unpermitted solid waste ~'~cility in vio~~tion of

N.J.A.C. 7:26-2.8(~ and have simi~~~l~ violated N.J.A.C. 13:1D-9(~1) by preventing I~J'DEP

fitotn

entering tl~e propel-ty to iiZvestigate pote~ati~l sources ~~pollution. Id. at 11.I~TJDEP ~rgu~s ~~eeause
it is ernpowerec~ to seek injuilcf~ve relief by stat~ite, ~it need ~~t m.~~ke any ~~~1~er showing

beyond.

~lefendatlts' st~tlito.~y vYolat~ions. iI i. at 11.
NJDE~' argues i:t is alternatively entitled to injtuZcti~ve relief purst1ant to the ~~etors outlined
.ids request
~l Crowe v. DeG~ioia, 90 N.T. 126, 132-3~ (1982). Supp. Brief ~t 12 13. N~DEp states

Page7af11

 N~:: , 16 6

:i u~:lr,~ HAN~~~EU~Y

-lun. ~, 2019 9; 24~M

for itljunctive relief i5 b~~S~~~. OIl "un~~mbi~u~~u~

St~tL1tOI~ ~Llt~lOiit.y

~t~~t is w~Il-setti~ci"

F'. ~;-'l l

lIl N~'~N

"cease [their] unpeimitted __
Jersey. r~~.. at 13. N~~EP ~s~crts its "_first goal" is to have c~efel~datits
success on the merits."
a1~d destructive E~ctivities" a».~ its "ri~lfs a~-e well-settXed ~~tld [] ei.~title~l to
the gz~auting of
rd. at l~. N~LI' claiY~zs the bal~~ncing of ec~~iities and hardships also f~.v~r
are negatively i~~pacted by
iz~jtlnctive rel. ~f, ~d. NJ7~EP states "thy people of I~ew Jersey
~~s ofcubic
[defendants' ~iCt1V1t1~;5 ... ~1I1~ 11T1~OI'C~lll~;~ ~li1CI CIUII]~~[ing_~ thousal

y~t'ds offill t~~~iteri~.l

that ~»s been detel~~lined to contain containill~~lts thatw~uld qualify cet~airl ofthe

~nateria.l ~.s solid

by tl~e propel-ty's location i~~,
vv~ste." rd. .~t 14. N~DEF Mates d.efera.d~ints' actio~~ are exacerbated
e:~plt~Il~if1011S
the Hi:ghl~nc~s Preservation A~~e~. 7d. at l.~-15. NJDEP asserts defendants'
~ic;t10i15,

~Ot' ~llS

f~~tn hi~rz~ca.rie
i?~:cludin~ th.e need. to e~~~~~ncl bus ~~rop~;rty for bt~si~ess an:d reinforce ~t

pro~~etty, particul~~rly in "the
damage, do zlot justify t}~e d~utnpulg of contamil~~ted material ors his
mist e1~~virol~nei~tally sensiti~~~ area ofthe ~igl~l~n.ds," rc~.. at 15. I~J"~~,P

Mates defenda~1ts' aetiol~

recieate
have ~~u~tl~er caused irreparable halm, j-e~~sot~ing "[m_~011~y c~r~not
ecosystel~l e~a.ctly as it was nc~i~ c~~ri money reveise l~~lf a decade

~, COI1t~T111Tlated

Of 1]T]I1Ce]1S~C~ C~.l1rI1]~11i~

coi~t~=~trlinated fill materiel," Yc(. at 16. Finally, N.1D~P states its request

of

far injunctive r~Iief sees

t11an harms, tale public
s,
to enforce st~.t.utory and regtil atury provis1oris as~d thereby sup~~ort ratllez
it~teies~. Id. at 16~ 17.
~r~, IlU
Despite ~~efend~nt reauesti~ag girl e?~tension of tiil~.e to file op~~ositi

O~~lOS1t10I1 l~✓~~~

~ng a stay untsl all rriunicip,~l.
tiled. I~efenc~aY~t has twice written fo t1~e col~l~t, price requesfi
cuinpl:~i.11ts have Veen r~solveci, a11C~ OI1C~ I'eC~ll~Stlll~ el1CI."~ Of OIlIj~ '~7~ p~lOT

COI7.S~I1tLC~ t0 ICIO'V1510I1S

filed in ~ccotd~~r~ce with tale
of the M~~cl~ 1, 2 19 consetlt Or~~el~. T~iese letters were ~4~~ec~, not
~ZI~l~S Ut COUI."~~

ion
These letters were :also late sent despite the extension of time to fi.l.e opposit

unopposed,
afforded t~ defend~~~t5. Thexe~or~, the court. considei~~ plaitltif~'s applie~tic~n

Page: S of 11

 .l ~ n , ~ , 2 i:) 19 9. 24 A M

N ~_ , 16 6

_i ~i ~:! r, ~ H A N '~ E~ U F~ Y

F. x:' 1 1

The New J~Yse~ Supr~ei~le Cou:i-t h~~s I~elc~ a ~pairty seeking injr~z?Ctive reliefnlltst c~emon:strate
the pai~t~'s
(1)t1~e il~ju~lction zs necess~:ry to prevent irre~~arable halm;(2)tl~e legal za:ght u.nderlyi~lb
claim is setEled;(3)it is reasonably lil~el~ that the pa1;~y will succeed on the Merits ofids claim; anti
(4) an analysis ~~~ the relative hardship to ~11e parties f.~v~ors the p~t~'y~ seeking t1~e ii~junetioi~~
Crov+ie 'v. .DiGioia., 90 l~.r. 126, 132-134 (1982). Yf

IS ~ellel~.~~y UI1C~e1St000~. f~l'-~~ X11 the

See

Cr~v`i~e

;f~~ctors must wei~,h in favor of itijuncti:ve relief. Waste Management ofNe u Jersey, Inc, v'. anion
reil~ecly~ of
Coun~y~ utilities .Atithoi~i~, 39y 1~".r. ~~~pei. 508, 520 (A~p. D~~v~. 2008). ``[T he
ig~lt
irijunetioz~ 1s ~t~ e~-tr~o1-dinary one and may not Ue awarded to any suitor tu~less and tultil his iHarrison v.
to it is establi.s~led by clew- and cc~livi,rticin~ testinlon~, free of all reasonable doubt."
F~_l

, 26 N~.~. S~l~~er. 333,347(Ch. Div. 1,953).
Ii~eparable harm is ~enez:all~ consiciezed to ~t~e hazel that "cai~alot. be addressed

adequately

~b~ monetary damages." Crowe, 90 N.J. at 133. Here, ~Iault ffl~~s presented clear al~d convincing
eileroaehing
evYcl~nee the i~~ountain~li~e amount o~ ~i11 material ~ai1~d on defet-~clants' pzo~erty is
OI1t0 11~1~1~OTlllg ~lO~ei"~1e~'.

This. is supp~1~tecl. by the descriptio~~s of the pi:operty ~by ii~spect.ors

w~io collected sasnp~es from it iT~. 2Q14 a1~d 2018, as well ~.s bar the ove~-lieac~ iin~ges ofthe prope~~'y
and
provided by n~;ighbors. Haan of t}~is nahire clot. ~be addressed wit~~. monetary d~nlages
thet-eb~ supports a fielding ofirre~arab~e Harm.
e

Tlie seeonci and third pz•onbs of t11e CrtoWe analysis are iel~ted. A pai-t}~ seeking uljui~etiv

ce
i:elief must show it his a rtasonat~le Iikelihooci of event~~~~ success on. the merits i,n ac~ot•dan
wi_tll well-settled principles of Iativ. Crotive, 90 N.,T. ~t 133. Here, I~~I~~l' ~l~,eg~s

defend~:tits have

facility
violated the follo~viYlg New Jerse~ statutes: N.~.A.C. 7:2f~2.8(f~ (operating a solid waste
a site for tl~e
vv~ithout a pei~iit); N.J.S. . 13:1E-9 (NJ~DEP ~Zas tale autl~o~-ity to eiltex and inspect
p~upose

Of 7.I1'tJESt1~~t1I1~ ~1~ ~Ct1011

ort suspected source of ~~ollution to ~t~~ enviroivz1ent); and

Page 9 of 11

 ) ~: ~~, ~. 2~i 19 ~:t~AM

N~:, 16 6

:i u~:~r,~ HAN ~EU~V

F', l i ,~ l

s
N.J.A.C. 7:14A-2~~2 (applying .f.~o~- anc~ obtaini.i7g a stormwater ~e~-mit pursl~ant to the H~ghlaiid
ng
1Xlater P~ot~etion ~.nci Pl~~ru~i~lg Act). These st~t~ites clemonstr~te the legal z~ght underJ:yi
NJ~~P's claims against cief'e~zdants are settled. ~owevea,'ovith re~arci t.o a reasonaUle probability
it
v:[' ~~laintiff's ulti~il~te success o~~: the merits, NJDEP bears ~ pa~~ticula:rly he~.'v"y burden as Illust
drove tl~ s factor using clear and coi~vrncing evidence,
~t th_e March 1, 201,9 Urder to ~ho~v~ Cause he~rr~ag, the court ~o~~~d pl~u~tif~`I~acl not met
this Ut~rde~i, as ~~1~i~1tiff had.identified only ~llat t~1e fill ~nateri:~l collected and analyze.in

~ebriiary

a
2019 li~'e1~ came fion~ defendants' pr.op~~ty. B~Catlse the previo~~s sample vii~~ taken fi~i~z
neighboring property end Iaot directly fro~~~, d~fendant~' pz~op~rty, plaint1ff c[.id not ~~~,eet the clear
("April S
and- canvincu~g startldard ~.t t1~.at tine. On A.pri1 S, 2019, NJ.DE].' submitted a. report
property
~epoz~t") det~:iling t]~.e sampling algid nzappin~ ~zaal~sis conducted on the de~'enclant's
following the March 1, 2Q19 consent Order. [- Jpd~te Letter from Plaintiff dated April 8, 2 1:9
("April 8 Leiter") ~t 1. The April g Repoa~t details eigl:it samples taker, firom eig}.it locations on
N.TD~P's
defei-~clar~ts' propeY~ty, each. of viw:l~ich, when tested, showed co~ltan~iriants e~.ceeding the
cl

residential soil standai,d~. 7c1. at 2, e~. A.]3ased oi~ these exeeeda~l,ces, the Inatei;i;als are eons~dere

Yd. at 2.
solid. waste stic~i thgt defe~zc~ants are "o~~e1~ating an ulal:.icensed. solid waste facility ,..."
sufficient
Bect~use these samples were taken directly ;front defend~z~.ts' property, there is now' a
viol~l:ion of
nexus to cle~~ly and convincingly show d.efenci~,ts' pro~ei-ty contains solid tivaste in
~d convincing
the applicable I~etiv Jersey statute. Accordingly, p1~~l~tiff demons~z~ates by clear
i

evidence d.efendai~ts have vi~~ated I~.J'.A.C. 7.26-Z.S(~} ~iy o~eratin~ a solid ~vvaste fac~]i~y ~~vithout
a ;pez~~~t,
do
WY,th respect to ~~laintift's adciition,~~l allegations related to N.J,S.A. 13:1 -9, defendasits
not hermit
Zlot dispute on or ~bouf Jaii.uary 19,, 2019, ~IlE~ ~~dvised NJD~,p itlspecto~'s they would

Page 10 of I1

-

 Jun. ~, 2(:i 19

9:2~A~Il

:i u~_lr,

N~_~ , 16 6

HAf~'~~E~URY

F'. 1 1:' 1 1

any access to t~ieir ~ropez~'y ~ith~ut a. searc~z'vi%arrant, thereUy~ vYolating NJDE~''s aut.~iority to ertlter
an~~l inspect a site for the ~ui~~ose ofinvestigating ~.n~r action o~` sus~ectect source o,f,'pollution. See
Complaint ~~13. With respect to plazn:iif~.s addition~J. ~1legations related to I~.r.A.~. 7:14 -24.2,
defendants do not dispute their ~ropel-ty is ~,ocat.ecl. in the ~';~eser~vation Aie~ of the ~i~.laiads

and

they have not obt~~ined a pei~n:it for their lanai distt~rbatice exceeding one a~ze to ensure the
sto~~.zi~v~ater runoff zs properly managed, thereby vioJ:~ting the ~ligl~l~iad~ VU~ater Protection and.
See
plaruun.g Act.'s requireil.~.e?.at t.o apply for a~.ld obtain ~. stoz~n~cxrate~ pei~nit il~ such situatsoi~..
C n~~int ¶¶ 1.4, 15, Moreover, the April 8, 2019 Repoz-~ coz~firmecl the pi:1e of m~te~~~~l
io
COnstlt~lfiil~

solici ~ast~ on defenci~nt.5'

I]~~~el"ty II1~ci5UTeS

appro~in~ate~y 2.44 acres i~l area,

placing t~1en1 iri violatio~l of'the ot~e acre limit.. See April S ,Letter at 3.
"TIZe frn~1 test in eoizsidering the gz~nting of a preliminary injunctioal is the relative
]1ardshi~ to the p~~ties in ~antiz~g or denying relied:" Crowe, 90 N.J. at 134. here, th:e facts weigh
on

strort~,gly in favor of granting injunctive relief. l~efenci~nts' pro~ei-ty is loe3tec~ in tl~e preservati

r do

yea of the I-highlands such that there is a public interest iia e~zsuring the i-uny~ff and. stol~nrv~te

nut negatively impact this ezlvironsnentall~-~~ :otectecl area. Mo~eo~ver; the coz~.ta1~.~irlation fr~J~z
ng

defendants' pi~pe~fiy h.as aL~e~dy been sf~own to negatively affect ~t. l:east. one of tl~.e ~leighbot~i
propei~ies.
Couclu~sion
Pl~illltlff~ Ilan

submitted clew- and convulcil~.g evidence of ii~-epara.ble hai~n, established a.

rea.soi~_able probability of success on fhe rt~ierits of its legal. cla~.ms, and establis~ied the equities in
this mattez bal~~ce in its favor. Plaintiffls request for a prel tninar~ injunction vvit~i restraizlts as
is
1~1,GIt1C~e[~. lll 1t.S OtC~~1 f0 SIlO`Y C~L1S8 ~11~CI OIl Fe~~Tl1c~I~ 22, 2419

. age I1 of 11
P

G-RAI~rr~b.