A federal judge in New Jersey has declined to dismiss a suit against two local police officers accused of using unreasonable force when they wrestled a motel owner to the ground, shattering his shoulder.

U.S. District Judge Robert Kugler, sitting in Camden, ruled that two Absecon police officers, Laura Winkel and Kevin Craig, must face claims that they violated plaintiff Rohit Surti's constitutional rights by subjecting him to excessive force during the course of an arrest.

“[I] do not find that officers Craig and Winkel used an objectively reasonable amount of force to arrest Mr. Surti,” Kugler said, denying summary judgment.

Kugler also ruled that Absecon itself should be offered immunity since Surti could not demonstrate that the police department failed to properly train the officers in the use of force. But If Kugler's ruling ultimately stands, the city could still be required to indemnify the two officers for any damages.

The matter concerns incidents that occurred on June 18, 2013, according to the decision. At the time, Surti was the owner of a Budget Inn in Absecon.

At around 8:30 p.m., Winkel issued a summons for receiving stolen property after she noticed a Dollar Store shopping cart on the motel grounds. She previously had warned Surti about having shopping carts on the motel grounds.

About an hour later, the police received another call saying there was an altercation at the motel between Surti and another man, Sydney Atkins, who had been living at the motel for about six weeks, according to Kugler. Craig and Winkel responded to the call. Those involved have presented differing scenarios as to whether Surti assaulted Atkins or Atkins attacked Surti, the judge said.

The lawsuit alleges that Surti became agitated, which led to warnings from Craig and Winkel to calm down.

What happened next is undisputed, Kugler noted: the officers used pepper spray and then, combining their physical forces, brought Surti to the ground. His shoulder was broken in four places, his suit alleges.

Surti sued, alleging violations of his civil rights. The city and the officers, represented separately, moved for summary judgment.

Kugler dismissed the charges against the city, but declined to dismiss the charges against Craig and Winkel.

There was, Kugler said, no evidence that Surti was threatening the officers or anyone else at the time he was taken down.

“[W]e find that the defendant officers use of force was not objectively reasonable under the circumstances,” Kugler said. “[T]his was not an objectively reasonable use of force.”

Kugler said he could not accept the officers' argument that they were acting in “good faith.”

The defendants contended that Surti couldn't prove his injuries were proximately caused by the officers, based in part on conflicting notes in his medical reports, but Kugler brushed that off.

“Proximate causation is a vague concept, but not so vague as this,” Kugler wrote. “Defendants' argument that Mr. Surti cannot prove proximate causation comes perilously close to the uncertainties of the undergrad who, discovering his eyes play tricks on him from time to time, concludes nothing is real, all is fantasy, and that when you believe someone has thrown you to the ground, that is illusory, for a note elsewhere says otherwise.”

The officers' attorney, Stuart Alterman, who runs a firm in Marlton, said he believes the officers will ultimately be exonerated at trial.

Neither the city's attorney, John Bannan of Reynolds & Horn in Marlton, nor Surti's attorney, Robert Herman of Linwood, returned calls seeking comment.