Legal decisions set many precedents for the insurance industry, but frequently those decisions lag behind what's occurring in the real world. A prime example involves the legalized use of marijuana. Approved for medical use in 23 states and recreational use in a handful, the federal government has yet to legalize the use, growth or sale of marijuana.
For many employers who have a zero-tolerance policy on controlled substances, the legalized use of marijuana (even if it is on the employee's personal time) presents some complex issues. As we go to press, the Colorado Supreme Court has upheld the findings of two lower courts in a case involving the use of medical marijuana by an employee who needed it to cope with spasms and seizures related to his quadriplegia.
The unanimous ruling by six justices (a seventh judge had to recuse herself because a family member was involved in a lower court ruling) found that under Colorado's "lawful activities statute" the term "lawful" could only be applied to "those activities that are lawful under both state and federal law." Since there are no protections for such use under federal law, the judges affirmed the previous rulings in the case of Coats v. Dish Network. (This case is cited in our feature on "4 Burning Questions About Medical Marijuana.")
The long-term ramifications of this decision have yet to be seen, but the case has been watched very carefully by employers because it could set an important legal precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.
For insurers, the determining factor for coverage has always been whether or not the covered event was illegal under federal law (see "Marijuana: An Emerging Coverage Risk" from the March 2015 issue). This ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court will further help to validate that position.
This month we're taking a look at a number of issues that can impact how claims and any ensuing legal cases are decided. Our cover story examines how information gleaned from behind the privacy walls of social media accounts can be used in court. Like cases involving legalized marijuana, there are very few legal precedents in this emerging area.
We also look at the "deep pocket bias" that sometimes emerges when a large company with significant financial resources is involved in a lawsuit — they can become an easy target for some claimants.
We've added a new legal column, Second Opinion, which will run quarterly and highlight some of the claims issues involved in different court cases. It's just another way we're trying to keep our readers on the cutting edge of a constantly changing industry.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.