Hazbro Realty, Inc. v. Township of Hazlet, 006452-2021

Plaintiff Hazbro Realty owned an income-producing property in Hazlet and sued the Township contesting its tax assessment.
Under N.J.S.A. 54:4-34 ("Chapter 91"), the Borough mailed a written income/expense request first by regular mail in May 2020 and, after no response, again by certified mail on September 30, 2020 to plaintiff’s P.O. Box.
USPS tracking showed the certified mail arrived at the Tennent post office on October 2, 2020, was available for pickup, and was delivered October 3, 2020; the certified-mail green card bore a signature and the same P.O. Box address.
Plaintiff did not dispute the address, contents of the request, or the mailing receipts; plaintiff’s owner instead claimed the green-card signature was not his and speculated misdelivery (e.g., another box holder signed) and nonreceipt of the earlier regular mail.
The court found the owner’s testimony not credible, invoked the presumption that properly addressed and posted mail is received, concluded the Chapter 91 request satisfied statutory requirements and was received, and granted the Borough’s motion to dismiss all claims beyond a reasonableness hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether certified Chapter 91 notice was received	Signature on green card is not owner’s; thus plaintiff never received the request	Certified mail was sent to correct P.O. Box, tracking and green card show delivery and receipt	Court: Presumption of receipt applies; evidence supports delivery and receipt; owner’s denial not credible
Whether an unknown signature rebuts presumption of receipt	Unknown signature creates reasonable doubt of receipt	Signature and USPS tracking are reliable proof of delivery; misdelivery speculation implausible	Court: Signature alone did not rebut presumption; speculative explanations insufficient
Whether failure to respond to Chapter 91 bars full tax-appeal relief	Nonreceipt (if credited) would preserve full appeal rights	Proper notice followed statutory procedure, so failure to respond limits relief	Court: Because notice was received, dismissal appropriate; plaintiff limited to reasonableness hearing per Ocean Pines
Credibility standard for rebutting mail-presumption	Owner’s testimony that mail was not received should suffice to rebut	Credible, corroborated evidence required to overcome presumption	Court: Owner’s testimony lacked credibility and corroboration; presumption stands

Ocean Pines, Ltd. v. Borough of Point Pleasant, 112 N.J. 1 (1988) (failure to comply with Chapter 91 limits tax-appeal relief to reasonableness)
SSI Medical Servs. v. HHS, Div. of Med. Assistance & Health Servs., 146 N.J. 614 (1996) (properly addressed and posted mail is presumed received; presumption is rebuttable)
Waite v. Doe, 204 N.J. Super. 632 (App. Div. 1985) (proof of correct addressing and posting raises presumption of receipt)
Waterside Villas Holdings, LLC v. Township of Monroe, 434 N.J. Super. 275 (App. Div. 2014) (owners must respond to Chapter 91 and cannot rely on confusion to avoid obligation)
Towne Oaks at South Bound Brook v. Borough of South Bound Brook, 326 N.J. Super. 99 (App. Div. 1999) (statutory notice under Chapter 91 provides fair notice of obligations)