Coats v. Dish Network, L.L.C.
303 P.3d 147
Colo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Plaintiff Brandon Coats, quadriplegic, is state-licensed to use medical marijuana under the MMA.
- Plaintiff allegedly used marijuana within license limits, never on employer premises, and was never under the influence at work.
- Defendant terminated Coats after a positive marijuana test and a drug-policy violation.
- Plaintiff sued under section 24-34-402.5 C.R.S. (CCRA) alleging off-duty lawful activity protection.
- Trial court dismissed the claim as not constituting “lawful activity” and awarded attorney fees to defendant; appellate court affirmed dismissal but reversed the attorney-fees award.
- Court consolidates appeal on different reasoning but affirms dismissal of the complaint and reverses the attorney-fees order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether state-licensed medical marijuana use qualifies as ‘lawful activity’ under section 24-34-402.5. | Coats argues MMA use is lawful activity under state law. | Dish Network contends federal illegality of marijuana precludes ‘lawful activity.’ | Not lawful activity; must comply with both state and federal law. |
| Whether a section 24-34-402.5 claim is the equivalent of a tort for 18-17-201 attorney fees. | Claim is not a tort; remedies limited to back pay and benefits. | Claim is tort-like and warrants attorney fees under 18-17-201. | Not a tort; attorney-fees not awarded. |
| Whether the court erroneously relied on state-law alone or disregarded MMA’s implications. | State-law interpretation should not automatically negate MMA rights. | State-law interpretation sufficient to determine lawfulness. | Court affirmed dismissal consistent with state law interpretation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2005) (federal prohibition governs interstate drug control despite state programs)
- Beinor v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 262 P.3d 970 (Colo. App. 2011) (off-duty conduct statute not previously resolved by MMA nuances)
- People v. Watkins, 282 P.3d 500 (Colo. App. 2012) (analysis on MMA and off-duty conduct relevance to lawful use)
- Gwin v. Chesrown Chevrolet, Inc., 931 P.2d 466 (Colo. App. 1996) (discusses claim alignment with privacy torts vs. statute-based claims)
- Robinson v. Colorado State Lottery Division, 179 P.3d 998 (Colo. 2008) (statutory discrimination claims and CGIA relationship analyzed)