April 17, 2013 THE VILLADOM TIMES III • Page 3 Ho-Ho-Kus Policeman’s suit alleges discrimination, wrongdoing by Jennifer Crusco Ho-Ho-Kus Police Patrolman Pete Tiernan has filed a lawsuit against the borough, the police department, Police Chief John Wanamaker, Lieutenant Michael Pattman, and John Does 1-5, fictitious names of other individuals. Tiernan claims he was denied the titles of detective and sergeant due to discrimination based on age, disability, or perceived disability in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJSA 10:5-1 et. seq.). He claims he “was caused great economic harm, emotional stress, damage to his reputation and future employment opportunities and/or was otherwise damaged.” He is seeking judgment against the defendants for damages, including compensatory and punitive damages, lost wages, benefits and interest (including pre-judgment interest), attorneys’ fees, and costs of suit. The patrol officer, who has been employed by the Ho-Ho-Kus Police Department from 1981 to the present, claims he has received excellent evaluations and performed the supervisory duties of a sergeant within the department for the past seven years, but has not received the rank or title of sergeant, although the suit states that he was referred to as “acting sergeant” by his superiors. According to the suit, Tiernan had reasonable expectation that he would be promoted to the position or rank of sergeant once there was an opening. The suit states that Tiernan “received excellent evaluations for his work in that supervisory capacity and only stopped performing those duties when he was wrongfully denied the promotion to sergeant and two other members of the Ho-Ho-Kus Police Department, Michael LaCroix and Jaime Bodart, were promoted to sergeant in 2012.” LaCroix and Bodart were sworn in this January. Because he is over 50, Tiernan is covered by a federal law that protects individuals against age discrimination. According to the suit, both officers who were promoted to sergeant are younger than Tiernan, “and have far less experience, qualifications and/or seniority.” The suit also states that Tiernan was diagnosed with prostate cancer in March 2009. He underwent treatment, including surgery. “As a result of the surgery, he suffers from side effects, which do not impact in any way upon his work performance or ability to perform his job, including any supervisory duties he might be assigned,” the complaint states. Tiernan was medically cleared to return to work and “has been able to perform all of his job duties despite the physical side (continued on page 12)