Bathroomgate: N.J. Police Must Pay Ulcer-Stricken Trooper

The New Jersey State Police must pay a retired, ulcer-stricken state trooper after allegedly retaliating against his discrimination claims by sticking him in a patrol car without sufficient bathroom breaks, the state supreme court ruled Tuesday.

Former Detective Sgt. 1st Class Brian Royster first brought up his claims of unfair treatment and discrimination in 2005, alleging that white troopers accused of sexual harassment and other misconduct were disciplined less severely than black troopers.

According to Royster, after he spoke out, his superiors gave him a battery of unfavorable assignments that allegedly caused him to develop ulcerative colitis, an inflammatory bowel disease that can cause “debilitating complications.”

Court records state that after his return from a medical leave, Royster was assigned to conduct surveillance from a car. Despite his repeated requests to be transferred to a position that provided access to a restroom – which his medical condition requires - the state police kept him on surveillance duty for around seven months.

Royster subsequently filed a lawsuit against the state police, asserted that his superiors failed to make “reasonable accommodations” for his medical condition in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In addition, Royster complained of retaliatory conduct in violation of the LAD, ADA, and New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA).

A jury originally awarded Royster $1.06 million in 2012, but a state appeals court reversed the decision in March.

On Tuesday, the state supreme court ruled in Royster’s favor, declaring that while it agreed with several of the appellate court’s points, “the interests of justice” require reinstatement of his case due to a legal misinterpretation about the defense of sovereign immunity.

The justices remanded the case to the trial court to mold the jury’s award of damages on the ADA claim to an award of $500,000 under the LAD, “the full amount of damages awarded by the jury without application of the ADA’s $300,000 cap on damages.”

Read the full court opinion here.

Photo: MyDoorSign.com, Flickr Commons

Send feedback to eric.kiefer@patch.com