North American Rayon Corporation v. Margaret C. Culpepper, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security, and Judy Howell
North American Rayon Corporation v. Margaret C. Culpepper, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security, and Judy Howell
Opinion
I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE EASTERN SECTI ON FILED October 3, 1995 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk NORTH AMERI CAN RAYON ) CARTER COUNTY CORPORATI ON ) 03A01- 9506- CH- 00192 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) v. ) HON. THOM AS J . SEELEY, J R. ) J UDGE ) ( Si t t i ng by I nt e r c ha nge ) MARGARET C. CULPEPPER, ) Co mmi s s i one r of t he Te nne s s e e ) De p a r t me nt of Empl oyme nt ) Se c u r i t y , a nd J UDY HOWELL ) ) De f e nda nt s - Appe l l e e s ) AFFI RMED AND REMANDED
W SHAW M DANI EL OF KI NGSPORT FOR APPELLANT . N c CHARLES W BURSON, At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , a nd VERNON A. M . ELTON, J R. , As s i s t a nt At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , NASHVI LLE, FOR MARGARET CULPEPPER
O P I N I O N
Godda r d, P. J .
Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon Cor por a t i on a ppe a l s a j udgme nt o f t h e Ch a nc e r y Cour t f or Ca r t e r Count y whi c h uphe l d a Boa r d of Re v i e w de t e r mi na t i on t ha t J udy Howe l l wa s e nt i t l e d t o u n e mp l o yme nt be ne f i t s i nc i de nt t o he r t e r mi na t i on by Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon.
W r e s t a t e Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon' s i s s ue on a ppe a l t o e a s s e r t t ha t M . Howe l l ' s c onduc t i n us i ng dr ugs i n c ont r a di c t i o n s o f i t s dr ug pol i c y a nd of a n a gr e e me nt s i gne d by he r pr e c l ude s h e r f r o m r e c ove r i ng une mpl oyme nt be ne f i t s .
At t he i ni t i a l he a r i ng be f or e t he Age nc y M . Howe l l wa s s d e n i e d une mpl oyme nt c ompe ns a t i on. She a ppe a l e d t o t he Appe a l s Tr i b u n a l whi c h, a f t e r c onduc t i ng a he a r i ng, f ound c e r t a i n f a c t s wh i c h we be l i e ve a r e a l mos t a l l t he f a c t s ne c e s s a r y f or a pr op e r r e s o l u t i on of t hi s a ppe a l . The f i ndi ngs of f a c t a nd c onc l us i o n s o f l a w ba s e d t he r e on by t h e Appe a l s Tr i buna l a r e a s f ol l ows :
FI NDI NGS OF FACT: Cl a i ma nt ' s mos t r e c e nt e mpl oyme nt p r i or t o f i l i ng t hi s c l a i m wa s wi t h Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon, a s a n ope r a t or , f r om De c e mbe r 5, 1988, unt i l De c e mbe r 13, 1993. I n Augus t , c l a i ma nt ha d a dr ug s c r e e n t e s t r e t ur ne d pos i t i ve f or ma r i j ua na . She wa s r e f e r r e d t o t he c ompa ny EPA pr ogr a m, a nd, on Augus t 13, s i gne d a c ont i nui ng e mpl oyme nt a gr e e me nt . Cl a i ma nt p a s s e d a dr ug s c r e e n t e s t i n Oc t obe r . On De c e mbe r 1, s h e wa s t e s t e d, a nd on De c e mbe r 8, t he t e s t r e s ul t s we r e r e c e i ve d wi t h a pos i t i ve f or ma r i j ua na . Cl a i ma nt d o e s not us e i l l e ga l dr ugs , a nd wa s a wa r e he r j ob wa s i n j e opa r dy. She wa s e xpos e d t o s e c ond ha nd ma r i j ua na s moke i n t he e mpl oye r ' s ba t hr oom, but di d not r e por t t h i s a s a pr obl e m t o t he e mpl oye r . On De c e mbe r 13, c l a i ma nt wa s di s c ha r ge d f or vi ol a t i on of t he e mpl oye r ' s d r ug pol i c y.
CONCLUSI ONS OF LAW The Appe a l s Tr i buna l f i nds : c l a i ma nt wa s di s c ha r ge d f or vi ol a t i on of t he e mpl oye r ' s d r ug pol i c y. A de c i s i on ma y not be ba s e d on he a r s a y a l one , a nd c l a i ma nt s uc c e s s f ul l y r e f ut e d t he wr i t t e n e v i de nc e of t he e mpl oye r . The r e c or d di d not e s t a bl i s h wo r k r e l a t e d mi s c ondu c t unde r T. C. A. § 50- 7- 303 ( a ) ( 2) .
Th e Age nc y de c i s i on i s s e t a s i de . ( Empha s i s s uppl i e d. ) Suppor t i ng t he f or e goi ng f i ndi ngs i s M . Howe l l ' s s t e s t i mo ny t ha t s he di d not i ndul ge i n t he us e of ma r i j ua na pr i o r t o t h e De c e mbe r 1 i nc i de nt , but t ha t s he ha d i nha l e d s e c ond- ha n d s mo k e i n a r e s t r oom of he r e mpl oye r whe r e ma r i j ua na wa s be i ng u s e d wh i c h, a c c or di ng t o M . Howe l l , wa s t he mos t l i ke l y s e x p l a n a t i on f or he r t e s t i ng pos i t i ve on De c e mbe r 1.
I n s uppor t of he r i ns i s t e nc e s he i nt r oduc e d por t i ons o f a p u b l i c a t i on s t yl e d " Dr ug s i n Mode r n Soc i e t y, " by Cha r l e s R. Ca r r o l l of Ba l l St a t e Uni ve r s i t y whi c h, i n a ddr e s s i ng pa s s i ve ma r i j u a na s moki ng, s t a t e d t he f ol l owi ng:
Pa s s i ve M i j uana Sm ki ng ar o . . . .
Si nc e muc h of ma r i j ua na s moki ng oc c ur s i n c l os e d a n d poor l y ve nt i l a t e d e nvi r onme nt s , non- s moke r s who a r e p r e s e nt s ome t i me s e xpe r i e nc e mi l d f or ms of i nvol unt a r y i nt oxi c a t i on, pa s s i ve a bs or pt i on of c a nna bi noi ds , a nd d i s c omf or t i n br e a t hi ng. Some nons moke r s who a s s oc i a t e wi t h ma r i j ua na us e r s de ve l op a s e ns i t i vi t y t o s e c ondha nd ma r i j ua na s moke , e xpe r i e nc e a " c ont a c t h i gh, " a nd t he n be c ome na us e a t e d. I t i s mos t l i ke l y t ha t pa s s i ve ma r i j ua n a s moki ng i s a pot e nt i a l t hr e a t t o t h e s a f e t y a nd we l l - b e i ng of nons moke r s , a s i t i s t o s moke r s t he ms e l ve s . ( Empha s i s s uppl i e d. )
The r e i s t e s t i mony i n t he r e c or d f r om a r e pr e s e nt a t i v e o f No r t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon t ha t a s e c ond dr ug t e s t wa s pe r f or me d, wh i c h c onf i r me d t he De c e mbe r 8t h t e s t , a nd a l s o t e s t i mony f r om M . Ho we l l t ha t s he wa s t ol d by e mpl oye e s of Compr e he ns i ve s Co mmu n i t y Se r vi c e , a n or ga ni z a t i on f r om whi c h s he ha d s ought
c o u n s e l i ng a f t e r t he Augus t dr ug t e s t , t ha t i nha l i ng s e c onda r y s mo k e " wa s t he s a me a s i f you ha d s moke d i t your s e l f . " Ne i t he r o f t h e s e he a r s a y s t a t e me nt s i s ot he r wi s e a ut he nt i c a t e d i n t he r e c or d .
The r e a f t e r , Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon f i l e d a n a ppe a l wi t h t h e Bo a r d of Re vi e w whi c h a dopt e d t he opi ni on of t he Appe a l s Tr i b u n a l a nd a l s o ma de a c omme nt r e ga r di ng he r " a bi l i t y a nd c a p a c i t y t o pe r f or m he r j ob" :
FI NDI NGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSI ONS OF LAW Ba s e d upon : t h e e nt i r e r e c or d i n t hi s c a us e , t he Boa r d of Re vi e w f i nds t he Appe a l s Tr i buna l c or r e c t l y f ound t he f a c t s a n d a ppl i e d t he l a w unde r TCA § 50- 7- 303 ( a ) ( 2) . We h e r e by a dopt t he f i nd i ngs of f a c t a nd de c i s i on of t he Ap pe a l s Tr i buna l but t he s a me ne e d not be c opi e d he r e i n f o r t he pur pos e of our de c i s i on. W not e t ha t t he e e mpl oye r ha s r e que s t e d a he a r i ng be f or e us t o pr e s e nt a d di t i ona l e vi de nc e c onc e r ni ng t he c l a i ma nt ' s dr ug t est . W r e s pe c t f ul l y de c l i ne t o s c he dul e a he a r i ng e b e c a us e we do n ot b e l i e ve t he e vi de nc e c oul d c a us e us t o r e ve r s e t he de c i s i on of t he Appe a l s Tr i buna l e ve n i f t h e e mpl oye r pr ove d by a pr e ponde r a nc e of e vi de nc e t ha t t he c l a i m nt t e s t e d pos i t i ve f or ma r i j ua na . a The r e wo ul d be a l a c k of e vi de nc e i n t he r e c or d t ha t he r ma r i j ua na us e a f f e c t e d he r a bi l i t y a nd c a pa c i t y t o p e r f or m he r j ob i n a n a ppr e c i a bl e de gr e e . I n our o p i ni on, t he c a s e l a w r e qui r e s pr oof of e f f e c t on a b i l i t y a nd c a pa c i t y, whe n t he c onduc t i n que s t i on i s o f f dut y c onduc t . Th e c onduc t i n que s t i on he r e i s of f d u t y c onduc t . W a r e i n s ympa t hy wi t h t he e mpl oye r ' s e a t t e mpt t o pr ovi de a dr ug f r e e wor kpl a c e . Howe ve r , we b e l i e ve t he l a w c ompe l s us i n a c a s e s uc h a s t hi s t o r e qui r e pr oof of e f f e c t on t he c l a i ma nt ' s a bi l i t y a nd c a pa c i t y t o pe r f or m he r j ob i n or de r t o di s qua l i f y t he c l a i ma nt f or be ne f i t s . ( Empha s i s s uppl i e d. )
Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon t he r e upon a ppe a l e d t o t he Cha nc e r y Co u r t , whi c h a f f i r me d t he de c i s i on of t he Boa r d of Re vi e w.
The Tr i a l Cour t ' s s t a nda r d of r e vi e w a s t o t he i s s ue p r e s e n t e d i s s e t out i n T. C. A. 50- 7- 304( i ) ( 2) ( E) , whi c h ma nda t e s t h a t t h e de c i s i on a ppe a l e d mus t be a f f i r me d unl e s s i t i s " u n s u p p or t e d by e vi de nc e whi c h i s bot h s ubs t a nt i a l a nd ma t e r i a l i n l i g h t of t he e nt i r e r e c or d. " The s t a nda r d of r e vi e w i n t hi s Co u r t i s t he s a me . Sout he r n Ra i l wa y Co. v. St a t e Boa r d of Eq u a l i z a t i on , 682 S. W 2d 196 ( Te nn. 1984) . .
One gr ound upon whi c h t he Boa r d of Re vi e w a nd t he Ch a nc e r y Cour t a f f i r me d t he a wa r d t o M . Howe l l wa s t he l a c k of s e vi d e nc e t ha t h e r u s e of ma r i j ua na a dve r s e l y e f f e c t e d he r wor k f o r No r t h Ame r i c a n Ra yon. Al t hough t he br i e f s of bot h pa r t i e s s p e n d c ons i de r a bl e s pa c e a ddr e s s i ng t hi s i s s ue , we be l i e ve t he i n i t i a l r e a s on gi ve n by t he Appe a l s Tr i buna l a nd a f f i r me d by t h e Bo a r d o f Re vi e w a nd t he Ch a nc e l l or i s di s pos i t i ve . The Appe a l s Tr i b u n a l f ound t ha t M . Howe l l ha d not us e d ma r i j ua na on t he s o c c a s i o n i n que s t i on, a nd t hi s de t e r mi na t i on wa s a dopt e d by t h e Bo a r d o f Re vi e w. The r e i s s ubs t a nt i a l ma t e r i a l e vi de nc e s uppl i e d b y h e r t e s t i mony t ha t t hi s wa s t he c a s e . Gi ve n t he f a c t t ha t i n h a l a t i on of ma r i j ua na s moke d by ot he r s ma y c a us e phys i c a l p r o b l e ms i nc i de nt t he r e t o, whi c h M . Howe l l t e s t i f i e d s he ha d s e x p e r i e nc e d on pr e vi ous oc c a s i ons , t oge t he r wi t h t he l a c k of p r o o f t ha t pa s s i ve s moki ng c oul d not r e s ul t i n a pos i t i ve dr ug t e s t , we a r e di s i nc l i ne d t o di s t ur b t he f i ndi ngs be l ow.
I n l i ght of t he f or e goi ng i t i s unne c e s s a r y t ha t we d e t e r mi ne whe t he r t he a l l e ge d mi s c onduc t a f f e c t e d M . Howe l l ' s s a b i l i t y a nd c a pa c i t y t o pe r f or m he r j ob.
For t he f or e goi ng r e a s ons t he j udgme nt of t he Tr i a l Co u r t i s a f f i r me d a nd t he c a us e r e ma nde d f or s uc h f ur t he r p r o c e e d i ngs , i f a ny, a s ma y be ne c e s s a r y a nd c ol l e c t i on of c os t s b e l o w. Cos t s of a ppe a l a r e a dj udge d a ga i ns t Nor t h Ame r i c a n Ra y o n a n d i t s s ur e t y.
_______________________________ Hous t on M Godda r d, P. J . .
CONCUR:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________ Do n T. M M r a y, J . c ur
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________ Ch a r l e s D. Sus a no, J r . , J .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.