(CNN) — The Supreme Court appeared sharply divided Tuesday in the case of a former commercial truck driver who was fired after failing a drug test due to a “CBD-enriched drug.”
A decision in the case, expected next year, could determine whether Americans who are injured by the products and lose their jobs can seek large sums of money in damages under anti-mob laws.
At issue in court is the RICO law that allows driver Douglas Horn to sue for business or property damage and allows plaintiffs to collect triple damages. The question concerned whether it was permissible to sue under the Act. .
After just over an hour of arguments Tuesday, the case appeared likely to divide the court's conservative justices, some of whom appeared sympathetic to Horn's position. But other justices seemed wary of opening up people's right to seek large damages in a runoff – factory injury claims.
Medical Marijuana Inc. and other companies involved in the distribution of CBD products argued that Mr. Horne's injuries were personal and therefore not damage to business or property as required by law. This prompted a fierce backlash from the court's liberals, particularly Justice Elena Kagan.
“If you lose your job and suffer damages, right? That means you suffer business losses, right?” Kagan asked the company's lawyer. Kagan said the law “simply provides that if you are harmed by a RICO violation in your business, including your employment, you are entitled to treble damages.”
But some of the court's conservatives, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, appear concerned that relatively minor injuries could open the floodgates to RICO lawsuits.
Kavanaugh said Horne's position represents “a dramatic, truly fundamental shift in how tort change is brought about across the United States.”
Horne had worked as a commercial truck driver for 14 years when he suffered debilitating pain after a serious accident. He came across an advertisement for a new “CBD-rich drug” called “Dixie-X” that claimed to be free of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana.
Horne tried the product in 2012, but failed a drug test a few weeks later.
He filed suit in the Western District of New York in 2015, accusing Medical Marijuana Co. and other companies involved in distributing Dixie X of violating the Controlled Substances Act and engaging in mail and wire fraud.
A federal district court ruled against Mr. Horn, but the New York-based 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals allowed his case to proceed. The company appealed to the Supreme Court a year ago, arguing in part that the RICO Act never contemplated “any product liability” case.
The company said allowing Mr. Horne's suit would significantly expand the number and types of “civil RICO” cases.
President Richard Nixon signed the federal RICO Act in 1970, giving prosecutors the power to investigate heads of organized crime families. Some states have their own laws. In Georgia, prosecutors are using the state's RICO law to prosecute former President Donald Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 election results.
Federal law also allows for private lawsuits by individuals who have suffered “injury” to their “business or property” under certain circumstances.
(Copyright (c) 2024 CNN. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Join our newsletter and get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox
Source link
