A federal appeals court on Thursday rejected a jury’s $2.2 million compensatory damages award to a former Port Authority of New York and New Jersey employee in a discrimination case and gave him the choice of either a new trial or accepting a $250,000 award.

In September 2018, a Brooklyn jury found in favor of Neil Sooroojballie on his hostile work environment claim against the New York-based Port Authority under Title  VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and federal statute and awarded him $2.2 million in compensatory damages against the Port Authority as well as $150,000 in punitive damages against his former supervisor, according to Thursday’s ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York in Neil Sooroojballie v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, Gary Frattali, individually.

There “was more than sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Sooroojballie was subjected to a hostile work environment based upon his race and national origin, and thus the jury’s finding must not be disturbed,” said the ruling by a unanimous three-judge appeals court panel.

“Sooroojballie testified that, from the summer of 2013 until he left the Port Authority in October 2014, he suffered stress at work from the hostile work environment, resulting in insomnia, anxiety and depression, for which he was prescribed medication.

“He also testified about how the stress trained his relationship with his family and led to his excessive drinking,” said the ruling.

However, said the ruling, “Sooroojballie did not provide evidence of lasting psychological effects from the hostile work environment, and had no further contact with his internist (who was treating his mental health issues) after he began his new job with the City of New York on Oct. 27, 2014,” said the ruling.

Mr. Sooroojbalie’s “proof regarding emotional distress did not contain the evidence or prolonged mental harm or negative, long-term prognosis that is typically present in cases with awards around $500,000,” it said.

“Therefore, on this record, the jury’s $2,160,000 award for emotional distress damages far surpasses the upper limit of the reasonable range and ‘shock(s) the judicial conscience,’” said the ruling in citing an earlier case.

“Instead, given the evidence in this case and our survey of comparable cases, we conclude that $250,000 is the upper limit of the reasonable range for the significant emotional distress that was described in Sooroojballie’s testimony.

“Accordingly, we grant a new trial as to Sooroojballie’s emotional distress damages unless he accepts a remittitur of the award to $250,000.”

Among the other rulings in the case, the panel also upheld the $150,000 punitive damages award against Mr. Sooroojballie’s former supervisor.

Mr. Sooroojballie’s attorney, Marjorie Mesidor, a partner with Phillips & Associates PLLC in New York, said in a statement, “As a result of the outdated $300,000 compensatory damages caps of Title VII and the inability to sue the Port Authority under state or city statutes, we were awarded $250,000 in compensatory damages and our punitive  damage award was untouched at $150,000,” totaling $400,000.

“I believe this is highest verdict against Port Authority and is cause for great pride in the work done and the egregiousness with which the Court agreed that Mr. Sooroojballie was treated,” she said.

The Port Authority attorney did not respond to a request for comment.

In May, the 2nd Circuit upheld the dismissal of discrimination and hostile work environment claims made by a former JP Morgan Chase & Co. banker but reinstated his retaliation charge.