JOHNSTOWN – A suit brought by a Penn State University campus police officer whose employment was terminated after it was revealed he was colorblind has been settled.
The university faced a discrimination lawsuit from Danny David, who alleged his conditional employment offer as a campus police officer was revoked by Penn State because he has a visual color deficiency which, in some instances, impacts his ability to differentiate between the colors red and green.
David has worked as a law enforcement officer for the commonwealth for more than 20 years, and began working for the university in 2016 as a public safety officer. About a year later, David applied to be a campus police officer and was offered the job, but was required to have a medical examination to make sure he fulfilled the mandatory requirements.
That exam revealed his limited color blindness, and Penn State withdrew its conditional offer in 2018.
David initially filed suit against the school on June 19, 2019 in the Cambria County Court of Common Pleas, with the case being removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Dec. 3, 2019.
David argued Penn State had no grounds to believe his mild inability to, at times, tell the difference between reds and greens would make him a threat, and the university never tested his present-day ability to safely and effectively perform the tasks of a PSU police officer.
David added it never submitted his application to the Municipal Police Officers Education and Training Commission (MPOETC) for certification, claimed the move to withdraw the offer wasn’t job performance-related and argued his color detection limitation has never impacted his police duties in more than two decades in law enforcement.
In a motion to dismiss the litigation filed Dec. 10, Penn State rebutted that David’s offer was to be determined by his ability to fulfill the medical requirements needed to properly perform the functions of a PSU police officer. The university went on to argue that PSU police requirements are similar to those of municipal officers, which is why they require campus police to be MPOETC-certified.
In a statute pertaining to that certification and quoted in Penn State’s motion to dismiss, MPOETC requires “the applicant shall have normal depth and color perception and be free of any significant visual abnormality.” It asked the court to dismiss the case, stating David failed to state a claim under the Rehabilitations Act because he doesn’t have a disability and wasn’t “otherwise qualified” for the job.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Judge Stephanie L. Haines denied the motion on Jan. 29, writing in her opinion that the university should bring up its arguments during the summary judgment phase of the case.
However, the university also filed an official answer to the complaint on Feb. 12, further denying David’s claims and arguing a number of affirmative defenses to counter them.
“The visual color perception criteria about which the plaintiff complains are job-related and consistent with business necessity. Requiring the defendant to eliminate or alter the job-related visual color perception criteria would create an undue hardship. Eliminating the color perception criteria would pose a direct threat to the health and/or safety of the University community,” according to counsel for the school.
“For the purposes of preserving same and subject to further developments through discovery, the defendant pleads the affirmative defenses of total or partial immunity, failure to exhaust administrative remedies, expiration of the applicable statute of limitations, laches and justification insofar as the color perception requirements are, under the circumstances, required by law and properly applied to plaintiff.”
UPDATE
The case was redirected to mediation and settled on Aug. 19, with the terms not being made public. Haines authorized and approved the resolution of the case.
A mutual stipulation was likewise approved in the case by all parties concerned and Haines on Sept. 14.
The plaintiff was represented by Margaret S. Coleman and Timothy P. O’Brien of the Law Offices of Timothy P. O’Brien, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant was represented by John A. Snyder and Madison V. Greenland of McQuaide Blasko, in State College.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case 3:19-cv-00205
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com