Arizona Attorney - June 2016

Medical Marijuana and the Limits of the Compassionate Use Act: Ross v. Raging Wire Telecommunications, 12 CHAPMAN L. REV. 71, 77-78 (2008) (“While many effects of marijuana dissipate over a short period of time, others—such as respiratory ailments and decreased cognitive ability resulting from prolonged exposure to marijuana—remain concerns over the long term.”); Annaliese Smith, Comment, Marijuana as a Schedule I Substance: Political Ploy or Accepted Science? 40 SANTA CLARA L. REV. 1137, 1142 (2000) (“Many studies focus on the effects of marijuana in the brain that may result in changes in cognition, learning and attention. … In chronic users, data indicate that long-term marijuana use impairs the ability to efficiently process information.”) (citations omitted).

24. See generally Weller v. Ariz.

Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 860 P.2d

487, 495 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993)

(“[E]mployers have a legitimate
interest in prohibiting employ-
ees from working while they are
physically or mentally impaired
by drugs. Impaired workers are
not only a menace to the vital-
ity of our economy but also to
the safety of the community
and other workers.”); La Fetra,
supra note 23, at 75 (“Employ-
er fears of employee absentee-
ism, shiftlessness, or malfeasance
while under the influence of
marijuana, even when recom-
mended for medical purposes,
rest on medical studies demon-
strating a wide range of impacts
that can occur, especially with
prolonged ingestion of the
drug.”).

25. See Burka v. N. Y.C. Transit Auth., 739 F. Supp. 814, 821

(S.D.N. Y. 1990) (observing that “urinalysis is not necessarily determinative of impairment from marijuana while on-duty”);

Nat’l Fed’n of Fed. Emps. v.

Carlucci, 690 F. Supp. 46, 49

(D.D.C. 1988) (“[U]rinalysis
drug testing detects any recent
use of tested-for drugs, off-
duty as well as on-duty. … [I]t
cannot show that off-duty use
necessarily has an effect on work
performance.”) (emphasis omit-
ted), aff’d in part and vacated
in part sub nom. Nat’l Fed’n of
Fed. Emps. v. Cheney, 884 F.2d

603 (D.C. 1989); Jay S. Becker & Saranne E. Weimer, Legalization of Marijuana Raises Significant Questions and Issues for Employers, 291 N.J. LAW. 66,

68 (Dec. 2014) (“Typically, marijuana is tested through a urine sample. … However, marijuana can remain in the individual’s system for weeks. Hence, a urinalysis is not a reliable way to determine whether an individual is currently impaired.”).

26. See, e.g., Peterson v. Neb. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 805

N. W.2d 667, 675 (Neb. Ct.

App. 2011) (“It was of the utmost importance, for his safety and the safety of others, that [the plaintiff] remain alert and unimpaired at work. Clearly, his use of marijuana prior to reporting to work had the potential to affect his job performance and jeopardize the safety and security of [the workplace].”); see also Kehde v. Iowa Dep’t of Job Serv., 318 N. W.2d 202, 207

(Iowa 1982) (“[T]he intoxica-
ting effect of marijuana poses
obvious risks to an employee
who is under the influence of
the drug and to coworkers.”).
27. See La Fetra, supra note 23, at
73-74 (“Impaired employees
… are more likely to make
mistakes when they are at work.
Employers may become liable
for misdeeds committed by
their drug-using employees.”);
Thomas H. Barnard & Martin
S. List, Defense Perspective on
Individual Employment Rights,
67 NEB. L. REV. 193, 202
(1988) (“[E]mployers have
become more acutely concern-
ed with the direct and indirect
costs of drug use in, or affect-
ing, the workplace. Additional
costs can occur through liability
to third parties for injuries
caused by employees under the
influence of drugs, whether
directly or on the theory of
negligent hiring.”) (citations
omitted).

28. See Coats, 350 P.3d at 850. 29. See id.

30. See id. at 850-51.

31. The Colorado Medical Marijuana Amendment is a state constitutional provision that created a limited exception to the application of the state’s

Save 10% while securely sharing data.

Want to: -Save time and money on data storage and sharing? -Send and receive files securely from anywhere? -Control and know who is seeing your documents?

Citrix ShareFile is the answer.

State Bar of Arizona members can receive a 10% discount for life with ShareFile, as well as a free 30- day trial and live on-on-one demonstration.