State of New Jersey by Walter D. Van Riper, Attorney-General of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v…

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the lower court, holding that the security deposits held by the electric utility were the subject of a debtor‑creditor relationship, not a trust, and therefore the six‑year statute of limitations barred the State's escheat claim. The Court reasoned that the payment of interest, the commingling of funds, and the lack of any intent to create a fiduciary relationship demonstrated a simple loan. A dissent argued that the deposits should be treated as trusts and that the limitations period should not apply, urging reversal.