Walmart Employee Fired For Medical Marijuana Use Loses Lawsuit Appeal

There’s no worst feeling in the world than thinking that you’ve done everything right, only to have the fruits of your labor blow up in your face.  The only thing that could be worst is if you also lose your job over it.

A Michigan man who was fired from his job at Walmart after he tested positive for marijuana recently lost his appeal.  Joseph Casias was an inventory-control manager for one of the company’s retail locations.  He had been diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor and cancer.  In 2009, Casias was prescribed marijuana by his doctor, which is legal for medicinal purposes under Michigan law.  However, this didn’t stop the big-box retailer from canning him after they discovered his usage.

Not surprisingly, Casias didn’t take his termination from the company all that well.  And who could blame him?  As far as he could tell, he was following all the rules.  Casias file a wrongful termination lawsuit and lost.  He then appealed, but Walmart still came out on top.

You may be wondering how something like this could happen.  After all, if Michigan law allows for medical marijuana use, how could someone be fired for using it?  The answer is actually more complicated than it initially appears.

While most people know that federal and many state laws have conflicting views on the legal status of marijuana, the reason why Casias was fired and ultimately failed to win his lawsuit has nothing to do with these differences.  Rather it’s a problem with the Michigan medical marijuana law itself.

You see, the basis for Casias’ wrongful termination lawsuit lies in the reading of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act.  In relevant part, the Act states that no “business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau” can take civil or disciplinary action against a person for using medical marijuana.  Pay special attention to the word “business” because this was what led to Casias’ undoing.

You can read the full opinion by the appeals court here.  But suffice to say, Casias believed “business” as described by the Act meant every business, and therefore the statute prohibited all companies in the state from terminating an employee for using medical marijuana.  Sounds reasonable enough, right?  How else could one interpret what “business” means?  Apparently, Walmart’s attorneys figured out a way and the courts agreed.

Walmart argued that the Act didn’t apply to Casias as it was only meant to protect patients from punishments from licensing boards and bureaus.  The court found credence to this oddly counterintuitive interpretation based on the wording of the Michigan statute.  In essence, the court determined that because of the context in which “business” was used and its close proximity to “licensing board” and “bureau,” the Act was really meant to only protect medical marijuana users from penalties levied by these types of organization.  Basically, business isn’t a blanket term covering all Michigan companies.  The funniest part is that the appeals court actually thought this interpretation was intuitive.

If this sounds pretty whacked out, that because it is.  While it’s more common for lower courts to come out with nonsensical rulings, usually higher courts are quick to correct such mistakes.  In this case, it seems quite evident that most people and indeed, even legislators, would read “business” in the context of the Act to mean companies.  Each term is offset by “or,” meaning each word is meant to stand alone.  It’s hard to imagine why a court would think otherwise.  But hey, whatever floats your boat, right?

At the very least, this case illustrates the complexity and downright uncertainty that can often arise over what can seem like the simplest issues in a lawsuit.  Casias and his attorneys probably thought they had this case in the bag, then boom, business apparently doesn’t mean business.

For now we’ll have and see if the Supreme Court will hear this case.  There’s no word yet on whether another appeal will be sought.  However, seeing that Casias is being represented by the ACLU, there’s a good chance this case may end up going all the way to the top.