The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Monday that Jackson Township improperly used eminent domain when it condemned two privately owned parcels as part of a land swap with a developer.
In a unanimous decision, the court upheld a 2025 appeals court ruling that the township was not authorized to use eminent domain to take property owned by Bellevue Jackson LLC and Getzel Bee LLC and give it to a developer in exchange for land that would be preserved as open space.
The court further held that the township did not “act forthrightly” in dealing with the owners of the private property it condemned.
A subscription is required to read this story.Subscribe now to continue.
Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote that municipalities can use eminent domain only to condemn private property for a public purpose — not to take land for private use.
Under the land swap agreement, developer Mordechai Eichorn, owner of Bellevue Estates LLC, planned to construct four private religious schools.
Eichorn did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Nino Borrelli, a township councilman, said he was initially skeptical about the land swap.
After looking into the proposal, however, he came to support it because it would steer potential development away from a densely populated residential section of Jackson, where neighbors had strongly opposed it, and move it closer to the township’s border with a neighboring community.
Jackson Township Mayor Jennifer Kuhn said Lots 84 and 90, the parcels affected by Monday’s decision, account for less than an acre of the overall property involved in the land swap. She said that township officials will pursue legal options to ensure the tract designated as open space is preserved.
The land swap agreement began under former Mayor Michael Reina, who resigned on October 1, 2025, after 17 years in office.
“The number one mission of my Administration is the preservation of open space,” Kuhn said in a statement. “As I have said many times, the best defense against overdevelopment is preserving every acre we can. With that goal in mind, I have instructed our township legal team and officials to fight tooth and nail to preserve every acre possible on this tract and throughout town.”
Township Council President Mordechai Burnstein said he was not surprised by the ruling but believed the township had a compelling case.
He said the land swap is not in jeopardy, “unless the developer determines that not having this acre, he wants the land swap to fall apart, which, based on the facts, I highly doubt will happen.”
Richard DeAngelis Jr., attorney for Bellevue Jackson and Getzel Bee, said the decision will have statewide implications by providing another level of protection for property owners facing “eminent domain abuse.”
“Jackson cavalierly invoked its eminent domain power to take private property without respecting the constitutional and statutory limitations on the exercise of that power as recognized by the Supreme Court,” DeAngelis said.
The township approved the land swap through a series of four ordinances. The first, adopted on February 14, 2023, enabled the township to exchange land and other property with Eichorn. The ordinance did not identify a public purpose for the exchange.
Jackson Township later sent letters to Bellevue Jackson and Getzel Bee, stating it was in the process of acquiring substantial acreage for “open space purposes.”
Subsequent ordinances led the township to offer to pay the owners the appraised value of their properties and authorized the acquisition of the lots through either an “arm’s length transaction or, if necessary, by condemnation/eminent domain” in “furtherance of a public use and purpose.”
The township then filed complaints to condemn Lots 84 and 90 under the Local Lands and Buildings Law and the Eminent Domain Act.
A fourth ordinance stated the condemnation “will permit the Township to exchange the subject properties, along with surrounding properties, to protect and maintain open space within the Township,” suggesting the condemned parcels would not be directly used for open space.
The trial court allowed the condemnation to proceed, concluding the acquisition served a public purpose.
The Appellate Division reversed that decision in January 2025, stating that the condemnation violated U.S. Supreme Court precedent as well as the Eminent Domain Act requirement that a condemned property be used for an articulated public purpose.
In its decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court wrote that allowing a municipality to condemn private property without adhering to the public-purpose requirement could lead to abuse.
The court sent the case back to the trial court to determine what remedy the property owners are entitled to.