Federal law does not preempt the Connecticut medical marijuana statute’s prohibition on employers’ firing or refusing to hire qualified medical marijuana patients, even if they test positive on an employment-related drug test, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut has held. Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., LLC, d/b/a Bride Brook Health &
Kathryn J. Barry
Kathryn Barry is an Associate in the Long Island office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Ms. Barry advises clients on compliance with various state and federal laws affecting the workplace, including Title VII, Family and Medical Leave Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State and City laws. She also assists federal contractors in the preparation of affirmative action plans and defends contractors against allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and veteran status in connection with audits by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and in related litigation brought on the OFCCP’s behalf by the Solicitor’s Office at the U.S. Department of Labor.
Reporting Reasonable Suspicion Tests To Third Parties When No Suspicion Existed May Give Rise to Defamation and Invasion of Privacy Claims in Louisiana
Requiring employees to submit to directly observed reasonable suspicion testing and falsely reporting to third parties that the employees were tested because of reasonable suspicion may give rise to claims for invasion of privacy and defamation, according to two recent decisions by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Cook v. Warrior …
Federal Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Public Employee For Failing Random Drug Test
The Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas did not violate a public employee’s Fourth Amendment rights by requiring the employee to submit to a random drug test or by terminating his employment when he tested positive for cocaine, according to a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Washington…
Employer’s Reliance On Positive Alcohol Test Was Legitimate and Non-Discriminatory Basis For Termination
An employer’s reliance on a positive alcohol test was held to be a legitimate and non-discriminatory basis for termination, despite the terminated employee’s argument that the test result was inaccurate. Clark v. Boyd Tunica, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35223 (N.D. Miss. March 1, 2016).
Plaintiff, a line cook at Boyd Tunica, Inc., underwent…
Medical Marijuana Business Expenses Are Not Tax Deductible, Court Holds
Taxpayers cannot take deductions for business expenses associated with operating a medical marijuana dispensary, according to a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Olive v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, No. 13-70510 (9th Cir. July 9, 2015).
In 2012, the United States Tax Court assessed penalties and fines against San Francisco’s Vapor…
Louisiana Employers May Use Hair To Test For Drugs
Louisiana employers now can drug test employees’ hair samples, thanks to a recent amendment to the State’s drug testing statute.
Signed by Governor Bobby Jindal on June 5, 2015, House Bill 379 closes an 18 year-old loophole in Louisiana’s drug testing law, which permitted employers to drug test hair specimens (in addition to blood, saliva…
Positive Workplace Drug Test Results On The Rise For Second Straight Year, Study Finds
For the second year in a row, the percentage of American workers testing positive for illegal drugs has increased, according to a recent study conducted by Quest Diagnostics. Quest Diagnostics’ Drug Testing Index (“DTI”) – an annual analysis of workplace drug testing trends – analyzed the results of over 7.7 million urine, saliva and hair…
Employee’s Request to Provide Information Excusing Positive Drug Test Could Trigger Obligation to Engage in Interactive Process
An employee’s request to provide medical documentation excusing a positive drug test could trigger an employer’s obligations to engage in the interactive process, according to a recent decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Jodi Hammel v. SOAR Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14361 (E.D.Pa. Feb. 6, 2015).…
Do DOT-Regulated Employees Have A Privacy Interest In Their Positive Drug And Alcohol Test Results? Maybe Not.
Employees subject to U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) drug and alcohol testing regulations may have limited privacy interests in their positive drug and alcohol test results of their positive drug and alcohol tests, according to a recent decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. McTimmonds v. Alcohol and Drug…
California Doctors May Soon Face Mandatory Random Drug and Alcohol Testing
This November, voters in California will decide whether to mandate drug and alcohol testing for doctors in the Golden State.
Proposition 46 – formally known as “Drug And Alcohol Testing Of Doctors. Medical Negligence Lawsuits. Initiative Statute.” – will appear on the ballot in California’s upcoming elections. If passed, hospitals operating in the State will…