ALLENTOWN – Lehigh Township and its Chief of Police have settled litigation from a female former officer of the Lehigh Township Police Department for $1.75 million – litigation which alleged that, over a five-year period, the Chief of Police targeted her for sexual harassment, discrimination and abuse, creating what she called a “hostile, toxic and intolerable work environment” that led to her resignation.
Jessica Edwards of Center Valley first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on June 26, 2023 versus Lehigh Township of Walnutport and its Chief of Police Scott Fogel, of Whitehall.
The lawsuit alleged Fogel made numerous inappropriate comments and exhibited objectionable behavior towards Edwards during her tenure as an officer with the Lehigh Township Police Department. Among them:
• In February 2019, Fogel allegedly commented that a cycling outfit worn by Edwards in one of her social media posts was “too revealing or scandalous” and instructed a subordinate to warn her of same;
• In May-June 2019, Fogel allegedly interrogated Edwards about her personal life and demanded to know whether or not she was engaged in an intimate, sexual relationship with another police officer on the Lehigh Township force, Officer D. This occurred despite the fact that the Lehigh Township had no policy prohibiting relationships among co-workers;
• In May 2020, Fogel allegedly summoned Edwards into his office and lifted his shirt, deliberately exposing his torso and upper body to her;
• In May-June 2020, Fogel allegedly made a crude remark in reference to the same inter-department relationship he interrogated Edwards about the year prior, which implied that Edwards was promiscuous and a carrier of a sexually-transmitted disease;
• In December 2020, Fogel allegedly pulled Edwards’ hair and snapped her head back on two occasions; twice in 2020.
• In November 2021, during a “No Shave November” event where male members of the police department grow mustaches for charity, Fogel allegedly said to Edwards, in front of other officers, “If you don’t want to shave ‘whatever,’ you don’t have to,” implying she didn’t have to shave her pubic hair;
• During a sexual harassment training seminar prepared by Fogel, a PowerPoint slide depicted a naked cartoon character above the message, “Don’t pull your d–ck out at work”;
• In March 2021, after Edwards made comments regarding traffic enforcement and public safety at a public meeting in Upper Saucon Township, both where she resides and while off-duty, Fogel allegedly attempted to issue a citation for “misuse of police powers” – despite Edwards making no inappropriate comments in actuality and being informed of same by the Upper Saucon Township Chief of Police, who also attended the meeting;
• In November 2021, Edwards responded to a medical emergency involving her daughter and was then two hours late for a training exercise. Fogel allegedly sought a doctor’s note to verify her explanation, a demand which Edwards says was only rescinded when the President of the Lehigh Township Police Association informed Fogel that the demand violated the terms of Edwards’ employment contract;
• In April 2022, Edwards dual-filed a complaint against the Lehigh Township Police Department, Lehigh Township and Fogel, with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging discrimination and harassment in violation of state and federal law;
• One year later, in April-May 2023, Fogel allegedly began investigating a baseless allegations that Edwards “had carried on an intimate sexual affair with a community member’s same-sex ex-partner.”
• Not long after that, according to the litigation, Edwards resigned effective June 1 of this year, after being subjected to “the malicious, wrongful, tortious and abusive conduct of Fogel and the complicity of the Township.”
The defendants answered the complaint on July 21, 2023 and denied the plaintiff’s allegations in their entirety, before providing affirmative defenses on their own behalf.
“Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against defendant Lehigh Township. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against defendant Scott M. Fogel. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by any and all applicable statutes of limitations. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by application of the Pennsylvania Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act. All claims against defendant Fogel in his individual capacity may be barred, in whole or in part, by application of the doctrine of qualified immunity. All actions taken by defendants were proper, lawful, correct and in full accord with all applicable statutes, regulations, customs, laws and usages. Plaintiff sustained no cognizable injury under 42 U.S.C. Section 2000(d). If plaintiff’s allegations of fact, all of which are expressly denied, are proven to be true at trial, then defendants acted unintentionally and with insufficient culpability to state a cause of action under any federal or state employment statute(s),” according to their defenses.
“At all times relevant to the above-captioned matter, defendants acted without malice and in good faith, with a reasonable justification or belief in the legality, lawfulness and propriety of their actions, and their actions were reasonable and appropriate considering all of the circumstances. Defendants actions were reasonable and non-discriminatory given the circumstances existing during the time period described in plaintiff’s complaint; therefore, the actions and conduct of the defendants were justified, appropriate and in accordance with all applicable anti-discrimination statutes. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by her failure to exhaust any and all available administrative remedies. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which punitive damages are recoverable. Defendant Lehigh Township is immune from an award of punitive damages against it. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which compensatory damages are recoverable. Defendants assert all statutory and common law immunities available to them pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and subsequent case law. Plaintiff’s damages, if any, were caused by plaintiff, herself and/or by individuals or entities over whom defendants had no authority or control.”
UPDATE
After an additional seven months of litigation, through which the defendants had filed for summary judgment in early February, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Mark A. Kearney noted on Feb. 23 that the matter had been settled through the efforts of U.S. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth T. Hey. Kearney then ordered that the action was dismissed with prejudice under Local Rule of Civil Procedure 41.1(b) and that the Clerk of Court would mark the matter closed.
Subsequent efforts from the Pennsylvania Record to ascertain the terms of the settlement went unanswered by plaintiff counsel, and defense counsel Patrick J. Boland III mentioned in a March 5 email that as the settlement documents had yet to be executed at that time, he was not at liberty to comment on the details.
The matter was discussed as an agenda item at the March 26 meeting of the Lehigh Township Board of Supervisors, where it was disclosed that the parties had settled the suit for $1.75 million.
When reached by email, Lehigh Township Manager-Secretary-Treasurer Alice Rehrig confirmed that figure as correct, while Boland offered no further comment.
The plaintiff was represented by Jake Glancy, O. Daniel Ansa and Ryan Ringo Corkery of Ansa Assuncao, in Wayne.
The defendants were represented by Patrick J. Boland III and James D. Greco of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, in Scranton.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 5:23-cv-02438
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com