The Supreme Court of Kansas agreed that the widow of a worker who sustained fatal injuries in a fall at work rebutted the presumption of intoxication afforded the employer where two drug tests showed the presence of marijuana in the worker's system... Read More

Construing the state’s strong presumption that where a worker tests positive for drugs after a workplace injury, his or her injury was “substantially occasioned” by the use of the illegal drugs [see Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)... Read More

Reiterating that in Kansas, because of multiple concerns, the rules of evidence do not apply to workers’ compensation hearings, a Kansas appellate court held the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board should not have excluded the results... Read More

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a Florida job applicant, who was required to take a drug test, but then offered no actual position, may not maintain a civil action against the prospective employer under Florida’s Drug-Free... Read More

Warning Employers About a New Enforcement Paradigm By Karen C. Yotis, Esq., Feature Resident Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter Something’s afoot at the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, and... Read More

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a federal district court’s summary judgment in favor of a former employer was appropriate in a discharged employee’s retaliatory discharge action, arising from the latter’s refusal... Read More

Harken back to my post of 4/14/15- “Section 2353 Extravaganza….” . That was the Roger Johnson v. R.C. Fabricators case which dealt with a Section 2353(b) forfeiture defense by virtue of intoxication, involving an injured worker with... Read More

Here’s the first batch of advanced postings for the January 2014 issue of Cal. Comp. Cases. Lexis.com and Lexis Advance subscribers can link to the case to read the complete headnotes and summaries . © Copyright 2014 LexisNexis. All rights... Read More

The term “refusal,” as it is used in Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44–501(b)(1)(E)(2012), carries with it an element of willfulness, indicated a state appellate court recently. Accordingly, where an injured Kansas worker was unable to provide... Read More

Court held that providing an inadequate urine sample is not a refusal to take a drug test In Byers v. Acme Foundry, 2017 Kan. App. LEXIS 12 (Jan. 27, 2017), a Kansas appellate court recently held that the term “refusal,” as it is used in... Read More

The proverbial sky could fall soon for drug testing and drug policies Since 1970, marijuana has been listed as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act, making the possession and usage of marijuana illegal under federal... Read More

June 15, 2015 No. 13SC394, Coats v. Dish Network In a highly anticipated decision, the Supreme Court of Colorado unanimously held this week that an employer may justifiably terminate an employee for his off-duty conduct, despite the employee’s... Read More

Karen C. Yotis, Esq., a Feature Resident Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter , provides insights into workplace issues and the nuts and bolts of the workers’ comp world. How risky would it be if your mailroom... Read More

The Supreme Court of Ohio, in a divided decision, held that a worker who tested positive for marijuana after seeking medical treatment for a work-related injury was nevertheless eligible for TTD benefits in spite of the fact that he had been fired after... Read More

It’s in the bag—urine that is. And can you even begin to guess why this claimant was wearing a bag of urine? I will let the ever-victorious Cheryl Ward tell it (eventually), but before I do, I just cannot contain myself--this case is a veritable... Read More