Electricity Shocks Property Owners, But Not The Court

Shock Treatment Insufficient to Constitute Inverse Condemnation

Yesterday, a New Jersey appellate court affirmed a jury verdict awarding $195,000 in “nuisance” damages to a Brick Township couple, but refused to reverse the trial court’s finding that an electric utility company’s stray “neutral to earth” voltage running rampant through their backyard was insufficient to amount to taking. Smith v. Jersey Central Power & Light Company (A-2801-08).  Mr. Smith received his first shock treatment back in 2002 when he attempted to get into his hot tub.  The problem persisted to the point where the couple removed their swimming pool, hot tub, and children’s swing set and abandoned use the back-yard altogether for a period of time.

The jury awarded $145,000 for property damage, and $50,000 for interference with the use of the property. Prejudgment interest and a portion of taxed costs were added to the jury verdict.  Immediately after trial, the property owners installed a new swimming pool. JCP&L moved to set aside the verdict on that fact alone. That motion was denied.

The property owners appealed the dismissal of the takings claim, and the denial of taxed costs, suggesting that the circumstances constituted an inverse condemnation.  JCP&L cross-appealed on the denial of its motion to set aside the verdict and raised several trial errors.  The appellate court affirmed on all counts, specifically rejecting the property owners’ claim that a taking occurred.

The full text of the opinion may be found here.