Federal Court Allows Employee to Sue Under Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Act

Although the Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Act became law in April of 2016, there has not been clarity on the rights of employees under the Act. In the employment law context, the Act prohibits an employer from firing an employee “solely on the basis of [his/her] status as an individual who is certified to use medical marijuana.”  35 P.S. §10231.2103(b)(1).  It does not, however, explicitly address whether an individual can sue his/her former employer for ending his/her employment in violation of the Act (i.e., whether the individual has a “private right of action” under the Act).  In a recent decision, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania — whose jurisdiction covers Berks, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Lancaster, Lehigh, Montgomery, Northampton, and Philadelphia Counties — became the first federal district court in Pennsylvania to address this question.

In Hudnell v. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, the court ruled that there is an implied private right of action for employees claiming employment discrimination under the Act. In Hudnell, the employee alleged that she legally purchased and used medical marijuana, disclosed her status as a cardholder to her employer, failed a drug test at work, and then was fired the same day she recertified her medical marijuana card. In reaching its conclusion, the court reasoned that it would be illogical for the Act to prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of an employee’s status as a medical marijuana cardholder unless the employee could sue his/her employer to enforce that right. Importantly, the court noted that the employee’s remedy for the allegedly discriminatory termination was under the Act, not a common law wrongful discharge claim.

The Eastern District’s decision in Hudnell signals a growing trend across courts in Pennsylvania on this question. As we wrote late last year, the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County also ruled that employees have an implied private right of action under the Act. Although this issue is far from settled, as there have not been any decisions by applicable state or federal appellate courts, it remains an issue that employers must be aware of.

For questions about this or any other labor and employment topic, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at Hoffman & Hlavac. To stay updated on this and the other key labor and employment law developments that affect your workplace, subscribe to our blog and follow us on social media.