Perhaps it is fitting that a lawsuit which languished seven years in state court would conclude with a ruling that,“defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is granted in part and denied in part.”
A Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit last week filed by a neighbor of a 600-acre farm that alleged his 3.6-acre property was damaged by stormwater runoff.
Alstede Farm filed a motion earlier this year to dismiss the complaint after purchasing the property from the ex-wife of the plaintiff.
The couple divorced two years ago. The lawsuit was filed in 2018.
The farm argued William Asdal, the plaintiff, no longer had standing to sue, since he no longer owned the property.
The judge agreed, but let Asdal continue his complaint as a “trespass and nuisance” action in the legal rather than the civil division. It would only be valid for the time before the Asdal divorce settlement.
Asdal argued the stormwater amounted to trespassing and the alleged damage was a nuisance.
The lawsuit was filed against Chester Township and Morris County in 2018 about what Asdal said was a “nonconforming” stormwater runoff from the farm. He said Alstede then asked to be part of the defense in the court complaint.
The appellate court concluded Asdal had been caught “in a multi-year Catch-22” between agencies, and was left “without an effective remedy.”
That ruling came when a three judge panel reversed a lower court ruling on New Year’s Eve that had dismissed the suit.
“The Alstede Family completed the purchase and took title to the Marcia Asdal property (the former William Asdal property that is the subject of his lawsuit against Chester Township) which adjoins our farm on March 21, 2025,” said Kurt Alstede, the co-owner of the family farm, in an email to NJ Advance Media this month. “Despite this, William Asdal has continued his lawsuit against the Township and our family.”
A representative for Asdal’s attorneys did not immediately respond Monday to a request for comment, but a court filing on April 1 lays out the argument.
“Moreover, (Asdal) incurred other damages by entering into a divorce settlement with his former wife based on a value of the Asdal Property that accounted for: the damage to the Asdal Property from the unregulated stormwater runoff from the Alstede Property. It is the Alstede Defendants’ actions in purchasing the Asdal Property, not Marcia Asdal’s decision to sell the Asdal Property, which is at issue.”
Chester Township Administrator Robin Collins declined to comment earlier this month after attorneys argued the case.
The appeals court case was initially argued in 2022.
“For 36 years we’ve been subject to dozens of complaints from Mr. Asdal, alleging a number of different types of violations, none of which have been proven to be true,” Alstede said earlier this year.
Please subscribe now and support the local journalism you rely on and trust.
Bill Duhart may be reached at bduhart@njadvancemedia.com.