Coats v. Dish Network, LLC
165 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 61,600, 2015 CO 44, 350 P.3d 849 (2015)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For an off-duty activity to be "lawful" under Colorado's lawful activities statute, and thus protected from disciplinary employment action, the activity must be legal under both state and federal law.
Facts:
- Brandon Coats is a quadriplegic and used medical marijuana to treat painful muscle spasms.
- In 2009, Coats obtained a state-issued license to use medical marijuana in compliance with the Colorado Medical Marijuana Amendment.
- Coats worked for Dish Network, LLC as a telephone customer service representative from 2007 to 2010.
- Coats consumed medical marijuana at his home, during non-working hours, and in accordance with his state license.
- In May 2010, Coats tested positive for THC, a component of marijuana, during a random drug test administered by Dish.
- Coats informed Dish that he was a registered medical marijuana patient and intended to continue his state-licensed use.
- On June 7, 2010, Dish fired Coats for violating the company's drug policy.
Procedural Posture:
- Brandon Coats filed a wrongful termination claim against Dish Network, LLC in a Colorado trial court.
- Dish filed a motion to dismiss, arguing Coats's medical marijuana use was not a "lawful activity."
- The trial court granted Dish's motion to dismiss Coats's claim.
- Coats, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the Colorado Court of Appeals.
- In a split decision, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal, holding that because medical marijuana use is prohibited by federal law, it is not a "lawful activity" under the state statute.
- The Colorado Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the decision of the Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Colorado's lawful activities statute protect an employee from being discharged for off-duty medical marijuana use that is permitted by state law but illegal under federal law?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Eid
No. Colorado's lawful activities statute does not protect an employee from being discharged for off-duty medical marijuana use because such use, while permitted under state law, remains unlawful under federal law. The statute protects employees' engagement in "any lawful activity" but does not define the term "lawful." The court gives the term its plain and ordinary meaning, which is that which is permitted by law and not contrary to law. Nothing in the statute's language restricts the term "lawful" to only Colorado state law. Therefore, for an activity to be "lawful," it must comply with all applicable laws, including federal law. Because marijuana use is a federal criminal offense under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), Coats's use was not a "lawful activity" and is not protected by the statute.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of employee protections under state lawful-activity statutes in the context of conflicting state and federal marijuana laws. It establishes that state-level legalization does not prevent employers from enforcing drug policies that align with federal law, thereby prioritizing federal prohibition over state-level permissive schemes in the employment context. The ruling confirms that employers in Colorado can maintain zero-tolerance drug policies, even for off-duty conduct that is legal under state law. This precedent limits employee rights and reinforces employers' ability to regulate their workforce based on federal standards, a principle likely to influence similar cases in other states with legalized marijuana.
