Search
 
 
 

Search

FILTERS

  • Please search to find attorneys
Close Btn

News

August 15, 2018

CSG Law Alert: District of New Jersey Dismisses Medical Marijuana User's Disability Discrimination Case: Cotto v. Ardagh Glass Packing, Inc., Civil No. 18-1037

On August 10, 2018, the District Court for the District of New Jersey granted an employer’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit for disability discrimination, finding that neither the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”) nor the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act (“CUMMA”) require an employer to waive a drug test. By way of background, the plaintiff, Daniel Cotto (“Cotto”), a forklift operator, hit his head on a forklift and was subsequently asked by his employer, defendant Ardagh Glass Packing, Inc. (“Ardagh”), to take a drug test as a condition of continued employment. Cotto advised that he would not pass the drug test due to medically-prescribed drugs that he was taking, including medical marijuana. As a result of Cotto’s inability to pass the drug test, Ardagh placed him on indefinite suspension. Cotto sued Ardagh for disability discrimination, arguing that the decriminalization of medical marijuana under CUMMA, together with the protections of the NJLAD, compelled Ardagh to provide an accommodation for him, presumably by waiving the drug test.

In dismissing the Complaint, the Court found that CUMMA does not obligate employers to accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any workplace, and Ardagh was, therefore, within its rights to refuse to waive a drug test for federally-prohibited narcotics. Because the indefinite suspension resulted from the treatment (the medical marijuana use), not the disability itself, it was not discriminatory. While undue prejudice toward treatment for a disability can be deemed discrimination against the disability itself, the Court found that such was not the case where marijuana remains illegal under federal law. The Court found its holding to be consistent with most courts across the country that have concluded that, unless provided for by statute, the decriminalization of medical marijuana does not shield employees from adverse employment actions.

This is the first New Jersey decision on medical marijuana use in the workplace, and, although the decision is narrow, it provides guidance on how New Jersey courts may address medical marijuana in the workplace in the absence of express statutory guidance.