Enter your email address to receive new posts in your inbox:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Like what you see? Share!

Verrill Dana, LLP

Verrill Dana, LLP is one of New England's preeminent regional law firms. With offices in Portland and Augusta, ME; Boston, MA; Westport, CT; Providence, RI; and Washington D.C. Verrill Dana provides sophisticated legal representation to businesses and individuals in the traditional areas of litigation, real estate, business law, labor and employment law, employee benefits, environmental law, intellectual property and estate planning.  The Firm also has industry-focused specialties including higher education, health care and health technology, energy, and timberlands. 

Disclaimer:  The content presented in this blog is for general information only, is not intended to constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any person as legal advice. While we welcome you to contact our blog authors at, the submission of a comment or question does not create an attorney-client relationship between the Firm and you. 


Tractor Supply Co. Plowing New Terrain in Medical Marijuana Law

Last week, the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico issued a memorandum and order granting Tractor Supply Company’s Motion to Dismiss in Garcia v. Tractor Supply Co. The Plaintiff, Rojerio Garcia, suffers from HIV/AIDS and was using medical marijuana under the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act (“CUA”), N.M. Stat. Ann. § 26-2B-1, to help to treat his condition. Mr. Garcia applied for and was hired for a position as Team Lead and took a drug test, which tested positive for cannabis metabolites. As a result, Mr. Garcia was discharged from his position. Mr. Garcia brought suit alleging his termination violated New Mexico’s Human Rights statute and that the CUA requires Tractor Supply Co. to accommodate his medical marijuana use.

Tractor Supply Co. filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that there was no affirmative obligation on the part of the employer to accommodate the use of medical marijuana. The court agreed. While the court paid credence to Plaintiff’s argument that because New Mexico’s Workers’ Compensation Act authorizes reimbursement for medical marijuana that New Mexico courts would find medical marijuana to be a reasonable accommodation under the New Mexico Human Rights Act, but ultimately found that “requiring an insurance carrier to reimburse medical treatments that have been approved by a physician in a regulated system” is different from “requiring that a national employer permit and accommodate an individual’s marijuana use that is illegal under federal law.” The court noted the public policy issues that would accompany such a requirement—likely forcing Tractor Supply to modify its drug-free policy for each state that “has legalized marijuana, decriminalized marijuana, or created a medical marijuana program.” Accordingly, the Court found that the CUA did not include an affirmative requirement that employers accommodate “an employer’s use of a drug that is still illegal under federal law.” Further, the court found that “[t]o affirmatively require Tractor Supply to accommodate [the plaintiff’s] illegal drug use would mandate Tractor Supply to permit the very conduct the CSA proscribes.”

Accordingly, the relationship between state laws decriminalizing the use of marijuana and the employment relationship continues to evolve. Verrill Dana’s Labor & Employment practice group continues to stay abreast of these changes and will continue updating readers as changes occur.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

« Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on Whether Agency Fees Paid to Public Sector Unions Constitute Compelled Speech in Violation of the First Amendment | Main | Employers Should Use Fall Protection When Maneuvering Around Eleventh Circuit’s OSHA Supervisor Liability Standard »