United States:
New Jersey Supreme Court Upholds Workers’ Compensation Order Directing Reimbursement For Medical Marijuana Costs
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
On April 13, 2021, the New Jersey Supreme Court
unanimously upheld an Appellate Division decision
affirming a workers’ compensation order which directed
M&K Construction to reimburse a former employee, Vincent Hager,
for the ongoing costs of medical marijuana he was prescribed
following a work-related accident which left him with chronic pain.
On appeal, M&K contended that New Jersey’s Jake Honig
Compassionate Use Medical Cannabis Act (“Compassionate Use
Act”) was preempted by the federal Controlled Substances Act
(CSA), and compliance with the workers’ compensation order
would subject the company to potential federal criminal liability
for aiding-and-abetting civil conspiracy. M&K also argued that
medical marijuana was not reimbursable as reasonable or necessary
under the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act and, finally,
that M&K, as a workers’ compensation carrier, fit within an
exception to the Compassionate Use Act for government medical
assistance programs or private health insurers and was therefore
not required to reimburse Hager for his marijuana costs.
The New Jersey Supreme Court disagreed with M&K on each
point. The Court held that M&K did not fit within the
Compassionate Use Act’s limited reimbursement exception because
the exception applies only to government medical assistance
programs and private health insurers, and does not extend to
workers’ compensation carriers. The Court further held that
Hager presented sufficient credible evidence to establish that the
prescribed medical marijuana represents, as to him, reasonable and
necessary treatment under the WCA. Specifically, the Court held
that “medical marijuana may be found, subject to competent
medical testimony, to constitute reasonable and necessary
care” under the state’s workers’ compensation scheme.
The Court explained further that “competent evidence relating
to medical marijuana’s ability to restore some of a
worker’s function or, as in Hager’s case relieve symptoms
such as chronic pain or discomfort, is sufficient to find such a
course of treatment appropriate.”
Finally, the Court interpreted Congress’s appropriations
actions of recent years as suspending application of the CSA to
conduct that complies with the Compassionate Use Act. Because
Congress has prohibited the DOJ from using funds to interfere with
state medical marijuana laws through appropriation riders, there is
no positive conflict between the CSA and the Compassionate Use Act.
As a result, the Court found that the Compassionate Use Act was not
preempted by the CSA and that M&K did not face a credible
threat of federal criminal aiding-and-abetting or
conspiracy liability. The Court ordered M&K to reimburse
costs for, and reasonably related to, Hager’s prescribed
medical marijuana.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Employment and HR from United States
