Harbor patrol officer’s suit heads for the wrong port

A harbor patrol officer was deemed medically unable to work and asked for disability retirement. When his request was refused, he claimed a violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Was that the right statute under which to file suit?

Accident leads to disability

John Lowry was employed with the Port San Luis Harbor District as a harbor patrol officer. While descending a ladder at a pier in the course of his duties, his legs became entangled, and his head and upper body were submerged. As a result, he suffered physical, psychiatric, and emotional injuries. His treating psychiatrist, Dr. Meredith Hannan, concluded he suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from the accident. She opined that he wasn’t fit to return to work and instead should be medically retired.

Lowry stopped working when he received a letter from the district’s workers’ compensation insurer that it “received information that your industrial injury has resulted in permanent disability and [the district] is unable to offer you work within your permanent limitations/restrictions.” The district informed him that based on his doctor’s reports and deposition testimony, “it appears that you are not fit to return to work in the Harbor Patrol Department.” Because of his “inability to return to work,” the district stated that his “single option is retirement.”

Disability retirement denied