cannabisnews.com: Judge Says Firing Employee Over Medical Pot is OK 





Judge Says Firing Employee Over Medical Pot is OK 
Posted by CN Staff on January 10, 2003 at 11:26:31 PT
By The Associated Press 
Source: Associated Press
A Sacramento Superior Court judge has ruled that a man using doctor-prescribed marijuana has no right to sue his former employer for firing him. Gary Ross, who was fired from Sacramento-based RagingWire Telecommunications Inc., says he provided company officials with a copy of his physician's prescription for marijuana use before taking a mandatory drug test.
Ross, who says he uses marijuana for a disabling back injury, maintained that under Proposition 215 his smoking pot at home wasn't illegal because he met the conditions of the initiative. However, Judge Joe S. Gray ruled Thursday that while workers may avoid criminal prosecution by state officials under the 1996 proposition, their employers still have the right to fire them because marijuana is illegal under federal law. Gray said Ross had no legal right to sue for damages over the loss of his job, which paid a $75,000 salary. Ross' attorney, Costa Kerestenzis, said he would appeal the ruling to the 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento. Source: Associated Press Published:  Friday, January 10, 2003Copyright: 2003 Associated Press Medicinal Cannabis Research Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/research.htmCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #10 posted by AlvinCool on January 10, 2003 at 15:50:09 PT
I'll take a shot at this one p4me
---Dr. Russo, is prohibition like a boil or is it more like a pimple? ---Actually, p4me, it is exactly like a bodily function gone bad. In this respect I guess you could compare it to a disorder that shows on the skin like a boil or a pimple. However much of the drug war is "behind" the scene and deep inside the prohibition machine. It also has a foul odor and is repugnant to the majority of our population.I won't say what it is because that would be practicing medicine, but to get rid it you would need an enema.And since Walters, Ashcroft and Hutchinson are just full of the drug war if you gave them exlax you could fit them all in a standard matchbox. Sorry, did I give it away?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on January 10, 2003 at 15:26:44 PT
p4me
Too much! I just finished dinner. LOL! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by p4me on January 10, 2003 at 15:20:55 PT
FoM, now you have really done it
The Alexa Cannabisnews rating has broken the top 50,000 and was rated at 48,868 a few minutes ago.I have been thinking about an analogy for prohibition for a while and if I were not out of things to say I probably would not mention it. I wonder if I should ask Dr. Russo about terminology in tonights' chat.You know how when a contaminant (I gave up on checking spelling a long time ago) gets under your skin and your body attacks it and it forms a fatty puss from dead cells. I get some all along under an arm where friction drives the contaminat under the skin. Now would this be a pimple or what?Because whatever it is, prohibition is like that. It is a contaminat to the body of freedom and it has many dead cells surrounding it where the freedom cells have fought to protect the body. It is one huge pimple though because it was a large contaminat that resided in the body for a long time. It might be large enough to be a boil. As gross as it is, I think many people want to pop the boil and the Canadian pressure only means POP.Dr. Russo, is prohibition like a boil or is it more like a pimple? I hate to say cyst because of spelling impairments and laziness in looking things up. 
Now, what else can I say?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on January 10, 2003 at 15:14:35 PT
AlvinCool
The more news that surfaces about Canada if it's medical or not makes it seem like they will have to legalize. To tie up the courts for years over Cannabis might not be worth it to Canada anymore I'm hoping and thanks for the explanation.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by AlvinCool on January 10, 2003 at 14:57:57 PT
Technically
In answer to your question, FoM, of can an employer fire you for going to Canada and testing positive here the answer is yes. If Canada "legalized" then the answer would be no. Since Canada is only going to decrim it's still technically illegal in both countries. Hence the employer still terminates you and you can't refuse the test. As I said if legalized in Canada then you would have been complying with the laws in Canada and could probably legally refuse a test for 30 - 45 days after returning from Canada.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by The GCW on January 10, 2003 at 14:47:58 PT
They don't fire You for using any other 
prescriptions, do they?Including class A narcotics... that kill You...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by boppy on January 10, 2003 at 13:36:21 PT
no reason is needed in Indiana
In Indiana an employer doesn't have to have a reason for terminating an employee. If they want to fire you, they can, pure and simple.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 10, 2003 at 12:19:14 PT
TroutMask
That is a good question. If it is legalized in Canada and a person goes for a vacation and then returns home to the states and they have to drug test then what?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by TroutMask on January 10, 2003 at 12:12:40 PT
Wondering...
Recent developments and this case got me wondering:WHEN marijuana becomes legal in Canada, will a visit to Canada be justification for failing a drug test here in the "Land of the Free"?Also: If one were arrested for possession here in the "Land of the Free", could one request asylum in Canada ("Land of the MORE Free") where possession isn't a crime?-TM
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on January 10, 2003 at 12:10:50 PT
Related Article from Snipped Source
Firing Over Medical Pot is UpheldBy Ramon Coronado -- Bee Staff WriterPublished 2:15 a.m. PST Friday, January 10, 2003In the latest twist to California's controversial medicinal marijuana law, a Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled Thursday that a man using doctor-prescribed marijuana has no right to sue his former employer for firing him.The ruling, unlike dozens of others involving medicinal marijuana in the state, is unusual because it involves the workplace. But like other court challenges, experts said it does little to resolve lingering questions in the law.Thursday's ruling found that while fired workers may avoid criminal prosecution by state officials under Proposition 215, their employers may still fire them because marijuana is illegal under federal law.Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/5848569p-6814347c.html
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment