WASHINGTON, June 17 (UPI) -- The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that punitive damages cannot be awarded in private suits filed under key provisions of federal law that ban government discrimination against the disabled.
The case that brought the ruling involved a paraplegic who was transported in a police van that didn't accommodate his disability.
Jeffrey Gorman "is confined to a wheelchair and lacks voluntary control over his lower torso, including his bladder, forcing him to wear a catheter attached to a urine bag around his waist," Justice Antonin Scalia said in Monday's opinion.
However, Gorman's disabilities didn't prevent him getting out occasionally. In fact, in May 1992, he was arrested for trespassing after fighting with a bouncer at a Kansas City, Mo., nightclub, Scalia said.
While waiting for a police van to transport him to the police station, Gorman was denied permission to use a restroom to empty his urine bag.
And when the van arrived, it was not equipped to transport his wheelchair.
Despite Gorman's vociferous objections, officers removed him from his wheelchair and strapped him on a narrow bench in the van.
Fearing the strap would place too much pressure on his urine bag, Scalia said, Gorman released his seat belt.
Eventually, another strap holding him to the bench came loose and Gorman fell to the floor, "rupturing his urine bag and injuring his shoulder and back," Scalia said.
These events had little legal consequences. At the station, Gorman was booked, processed and released. He was later convicted of misdemeanor trespass.
However, the medical consequences were far more severe.
Gorman suffered a bladder infection, serious lower back pain and uncontrollable spasms in his paralyzed areas, Scalia said.
Gorman filed suit in federal court against members of the police commission, the police chief and the officer who drove the van.
The suit contended that the officials discriminated against him because of his disability in violation of section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Section 202 of the ADA bans discrimination against the disabled by public entities; section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act bans the same thing by any entity receiving public funds, including private organizations.
A jury subsequently awarded Gorman more than $1 million dollars in compensatory damages -- to make up for his actual injuries -- and $1.2 million in punitive damages to punish the defendants for their behavior.
However, a federal judge threw out the punitive damages, saying they were not available under the provisions of either law.
When an appeals court reversed, Kansas City officials asked the Supreme Court for review.
In his opinion reversing the appeals court Monday, Scalia notes that both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act are tied to provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded programs.
Title VI allows private individuals to sue, but does not allow the awarding of punitive damages.
It also "follows that (punitive damages) may not be awarded in suits brought under section 202 of the ADA and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act," Scalia said.
(No. 01-682, Barnes et al. vs. Gorman)
