Following the event, Officer O'Neil saw several doctors who diagnosed him as suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”), anxiety, depression and sleep disorder. He did not return to work.

Officer O'Neil applied for accidental disability retirement benefits attributable to the emotional injury he suffered when, in performing his duty as a police officer, he discovered his brother dead by a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The board of trustees of the Police and Firemen's Retirement System denied the application, determining that Officer O'Neil was not totally and permanently disabled.

An administrative law judge (“ALJ”) heard testimony from Officer O'Neil; Dr. David Pilchman, a psychology expert who evaluated Officer O'Neil twice; Dr. Jakob Steinberg, Officer O'Neil's treating psychologist and traumatic stress expert; and Dr. Richard Filippone, the board's medical expert.

Officer O'Neil testified that he never expected to handle a matter involving his family. He pointed out that he was not a police officer in the municipality where his brother had committed suicide and that he had been asked to respond because the state police had not been able to handle the matter.

According to Officer O'Neil, he believed that it was the department's policy not to assign officers to situations involving family members, and that had the dispatcher known that the matter involved his brother, a different police officer would have been dispatched. Officer O'Neil testified that since the incident he could not return to work and could not handle a gun.

During the hearing, Officer O'Neil presented the testimony of two medical experts. Dr. Pilchman testified that although police officers were trained to deal with horrific situations, including suicide, the trauma was heightened when the matter was personal to the officer. Dr. Pilchman also testified that witnessing the suicide of a family member was vastly different from witnessing the suicide of a stranger. According to Dr. Pilchman, as a result of this incident, Officer O'Neil was incapable of returning to work as a police officer.

Concurring with Dr. Pilchman, Dr. Steinberg testified that Officer O'Neil was totally and permanently disabled.

Contrary to the testimony of Officer O'Neil's medical experts, the board's expert, Dr. Filippone, testified that Officer O'Neil had suffered only a minor impact from the incident and was not disabled.

The ALJ found that the testimony of Officer O'Neil and Officer O'Neil's medical experts was more credible than the testimony of the board's medical expert. Based on that credible testimony, the ALJ found that Officer O'Neil was permanently and totally disabled and awarded him accidental disability retirement benefits.

The board rejected the ALJ's recommendation and concluded that Officer O'Neil was not eligible for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Officer O'Neill appealed to a New Jersey court.

The Court's Decision

The court reversed and remanded to the board to grant accidental disability retirement benefits to Officer O'Neil.

In its decision, the court explained that, to qualify for accidental disability retirement benefits, Officer O'Neill had to prove that:

1. he was permanently and totally disabled

2. as a direct result of a traumatic event that was

a. identifiable as to time and place,

b. undesigned and unexpected, and

c. caused by a circumstance external to him (not the result of pre-existing disease that was aggravated or accelerated by the work);

3. the traumatic event occurred during and as a result of his regular or assigned duties;

4. the disability was not the result of his willful negligence; and

5. he was mentally or physically incapacitated from performing his usual or any other duty.

The court examined whether the traumatic event experienced by Officer O'Neil qualified as “undesigned and unexpected,” and it found that it did.

The court pointed out that, during the course of his police duties, Officer O'Neil was unexpectedly confronted with his brother's suicide. The court noted that although Officer O'Neil had responded to other horrific situations in the performance of his duties, he had never been called to a scene involving a family member, and ordinarily would not have been given such an assignment.

In the court's opinion, and contrary to the board's view, there was nothing ordinary or expected about responding to the suicide of a family member. There was no evidence in the record establishing that personal tragedies were expected to occur during the performance of police work or that that officers were prepared for the occurrence of personal tragedies. Training that might be provided to a police officer regarding a stranger's suicide would not prepare an officer encountering the suicide of a family member, the court added.

The court then held that because the incident “uniquely involved a close family member,” the board had erred in determining that Officer O'Neil's discovery of his brother's suicide was not “undesigned and unexpected.”

Finally, the court determined that Officer O'Neil's injury had resulted from “direct personal experience of a terrifying or horror-inducing event” that involved “actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a similarly serious threat to the physical integrity of the member or another person,” even though Officer O'Neill had not been subjected to the threat of death or serious injury and had not witnessed his brother discharge the gun. The court reasoned that Officer O'Neil's discovery of his brother's body had been a “direct personal experience” involving the death of his brother, not a stranger, and qualified as a “horror-inducing event.”

The case is O'Neil v. Board of Trustees, Police and Firemen's Retirement System, No. A-4846-15T3 (N.J. Super. Ct. Oct. 10, 2017). Attorneys involved include: John D. Feeley argued the cause for appellant (Feeley & LaRocca, LLC, and The Blanco Law Firm, LLC, attorneys; Mr. Feeley on the brief; Pablo N. Blanco, of counsel and on the brief). Cameryn J. Hinton, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Christopher S. Porrino, Attorney General, attorney; Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ms. Hinton, on the brief).