California Highway Patrol uniform. (Photo: IgorGolovniov/Shutterstock.com)

An appellate court has revived a discrimination lawsuit brought by a former California Highway Patrol officer who claims he faced harassment within the agency because he is gay.

Former CHP officer Jay Brome sued the agency in September 2016 under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) claiming he suffered harassment and discrimination because of his sexual orientation throughout his 20-year career. Brome claimed, in part, that other officers frequently refused to provide him backup in dangerous assignments, resulting in his mental state deteriorating to the point he became suicidal and unable to work.

A trial court in Solano County had previously dismissed Brome's claims as untimely. But on Tuesday, the First District Court of Appeal revived Brome's claims finding that his earlier filing of workers' compensation claims stopped the clock on his one-year deadline to file claims under FEHA. The court also held that the CHP could potentially be held liable for acts occurring before the one-year limitations period under the so-called "continuing violation doctrine" if the actions could be sufficiently linked to unlawful conduct that occurred within the period.

"Here, a jury could reasonably conclude that Brome's workers' compensation claim put the Patrol on notice of his potential discrimination claims," wrote First District Justice Gordon Burns, noting that Brome's workers' compensation claim asserted a "work-related stress injury" during the limitations period. "The same circumstances form the basis for Brome's discrimination claims, as his stress injury was caused by the harassment and hostile work environment he alleges," wrote Burns, in an opinion joined by Justices Mark Simons and Henry Needham Jr.

Brome's lawyer, Lisa Ells of Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld, said in a phone interview Wednesday that the court's opinion reinforces guidance from the California Supreme Court and the state legislature urging courts to have trials on the merits in FEHA cases rather than "tossing them out on technicalities." The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) submitted an amicus brief backing Brome's bid to revive his case arguing that anti-LGBT bias in law enforcement remains a pervasive problem in California and around the country. NCLR's Asaf Orr said in a phone interview that the decision shows that "the court recognizes that it has an important role to play in addressing homophobia that still exists in law enforcement."

Brome, who worked in the CHP's San Francisco and Contra Costa offices before transferring to Solano County in 2008, claims in the lawsuit that he was subjected to derogatory, homophobic comments and singled out for pranks because he was gay. He claims that, in a break from tradition, his photograph was never displayed in the office after he won the Solano Area Officer of the Year Award in October 2013, even after he repeatedly brought the issue up with his superiors.

"If they're treating their officer like this, it raises very grave concerns about how they are treating others," Ells said.

The CHP said in a statement that it "holds its employees to high standards of conduct and strictly enforces its Equal Employment Opportunity policy designed to ensure a work environment free of discrimination and harassment." The CHP didn't respond to request for comment Wednesday.