Opinion ID: 2346588
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Stango v. Lower Township Police Department

Text: Petitioner Samuel Stango was a uniformed patrolman for the Lower Township Police Department for nine years, prior to his honorable resignation in 2000. On February 18, 1994, Stango and a fellow officer, David Douglass, responded to the scene of a domestic dispute. When they arrived, the officers split up and took separate routes around the property. As Stango approached the backyard, he heard what sounded like gunshots. Stango found Douglass lying on the ground, the victim of a shooting in the throat. Stango held Douglass, who was bleeding from the mouth and ears, and watched him die. Following the incident, Stango noticed an increased anxiety level and began having problems with awakening at night with panic feelings, anxiety and sweats, coupled with flashbacks and bad dreams. He continued to work, however, without reporting his symptoms to the Lower Township Police Department because he felt that it would just go away over time. In February 2000, Stango experienced what he called a trigger incident that led to a considerable increase in his anxiety level. He was carrying balloons into his house for his twin daughters' birthday party when one of the balloons burst. The pop sound triggered a flashback that was extremely intense and anxiety provoking. That experience, in turn, set off a series of disturbing dreams involving snipers. After the February incident, Stango sought help from several sources, including fellow officers, an FBI agent, and a Stress Unit on the Internet that referred him to a psychologist. On April 5, 2000, Stango discussed his troubles with his lieutenant who relieved him of his duties, requested the surrender of his service weapon, and referred him to an Employee Assistance Program. On April 13, 2000, Stango filed two claim petitions for Workers' Compensation, one alleging that the date of his accident or occupational exposure was February 13, 2000 (the date of the balloon-popping flashback), and the other identifying the date as February 18, 1994 (the initial shooting incident). The Department's insurer refused to cover Stango's treatment. On May 3, 2000, Stango was treated by Dr. Lawrence Clinton, a psychiatrist who concluded that he suffers from an ongoing, chronic post traumatic stress disorder with anxiety reaction secondary to the work related incident when his partner was shot and Mr. Stango observed his death. The doctor recommended psychotherapy, biofeedback, and medication. On June 6, 2000, Stango filed a motion for medical and temporary disability benefits requesting payment for psychological/psychiatric treatment and payment for time lost due to his work-related injury. The Department filed an answer and a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with the time limitations set forth in N.J.S.A. 34:15-41 and -51.
Although the facts of their cases are quite distinct, because Brunell and Stango raised many of the same legal issues, and because both the Wildwood Crest and Lower Township Police Departments were represented by the same lawyer, the two cases were consolidated and argued together before a single Judge of Compensation. The judge granted the motions to dismiss because neither petition was filed within two years of the accident. The Appellate Division affirmed. Brunell v. Wildwood Crest Police Dep't, 348 N.J.Super. 180, 791 A. 2d 1030 (2002). In so doing, the panel focused on whether the claims for compensation based on PTSD should be adjudicated under the two-year accident statute of limitations, N.J.S.A. 34:15-41 and N.J.S.A. 34:15-51, or under the less onerous discovery-rule limitations period prescribed for occupational diseases. N.J.S.A. 34:15-34. Relying on Prettyman v. State, 298 N.J.Super. 580, 689 A. 2d 1365 (App.Div.1997), and Schwarz v. Federal Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., 16 N.J. 243, 108 A. 2d 417 (1954), the court held that PTSD is compensable under the accident provision of the workers' compensation statute when it arises from a single event. Id. at 189-92, 791 A. 2d 1030. Citing Schwarz, the panel stated: [O]urs is an `accident' statute and not an `injury' statute. Our courts have found no indication of a legislative purpose to suspend the running of the statute until the injury becomes manifest. Brunell, supra, 348 N.J.Super. at 191, 791 A. 2d 1030 (citing Schwarz, supra, 16 N.J. at 251, 108 A. 2d 417). Because the accidents suffered by Brunell and Stango preceded the filings by more than two years, the court ruled that the claims were properly dismissed. We granted certification, Stango v. Lower Township Police Dep't, 172 N.J. 359, 798 A. 2d 1272 (2002) and Brunell v. Wildwood Crest Police Dep't, 174 N.J. 40, 803 A. 2d 635 (2002), and now reverse.