CASE STUDY #2 ROE V. TELETECH CUSTOMER CARE MANAGEMENT COLORADO LLC Summary After TeleTech Customer Care Management, LLC (TeleTech) withdrew the conditional offer of employment it had made to Jane Roe because she failed a preemployment drug screening test, Roe sued Teletech alleging wrongful termination. The trial court denied Roe's motion for summary judgment' and awarded summary judgment? to TeleTech. On appeal, Roe argues that the Washington State Medical Use of Marijuana Act (MUMA), implies a person can sue an employer who violates MUMA's provisions. Alternatively, Roe contends that MUMA expresses a public policy favoring medical marijuana use and that TeleTech wrongfully terminated her employment when it violated this policy Facts Roe sought authorization under MUMA to use medical marijuana to treat her migraine headaches. Roe became a patient of Thomas Orvald, M.D. at The Hemp and Cannabis Foundation (THCF) Medical Clinic in Bellevue, Washington. On June 26, 2006, Roe filled out a "Pain Inventory Questionnaire" at the THCF clinic and Orvald provided Motion for Summary Judgment: A motion for summary judgment is a request for the court to rule that the other party has no case, because there are no facts at issue. The party making the motion is claiming that either the case should not go before a jury at all, or a jury could only rule in favor of the moving party. Summary Judgment: Judgment that may be granted upon a party's motion when the pleadings, discovery, and any affidavits show that there is no issue of material fact and that the party is entitled to judgment in its favor as matter of law Roe with "Documentation of Medical Authorization to Possess Marijuana for Medical Purposes" that same day. TeleTech describes itself as an "outsourcing company that provides a full range of front- to back-office outsourced solutions." TeleTech contracts with Sprint Nextel to provide telemarketing and telesales services out of its customer service center in Bremerton, Washington. TeleTech has an applicant drug policy that states in part: TeleTech has a vital interest in ensuring a safe, healthy, and efficient working environment, and in preventing accidents and injuries resulting from the misuse of alcohol or drugs. The unlawful or improper presence or use of drugs or alcohol in the workplace presents a danger to everyone. All applicants to whom TeleTech has given a conditional offer of employment, are required to submit to a pre-employment drug test and must receive a negative result as a condition of employment. Any applicant who receives a confirmed positive drug test result will be ineligible for employment with the company. Sprint Nextel requires TeleTech to perform applicant drug screenings before assigning any individual to work at the Bremerton facility On October 3, 2006, TeleTech hired Roe to work as a customer service consultant in its Bremerton facility. On that date, TeleTech provided Roe with a copy of its substance abuse policy for job applicants. After learning that she would be required to submit to drug testing, Roe told TeleTech that she uses medical marijuana at home and that she had medical authorization to do so. Roe offered to provide TeleTech with her medical marijuana authorization, but TeleTech declined. On October 5, 2006, Roe took a drug test administered by ChoicePoint Workplace Solutions. On October 10, 2006, Roe began working for TeleTech and TeleTech provided Roe a copy of its substance abuse policy for employees. Roe's drug test results also came back on October 10, 2006. When Roe tested positive for marijuana, Mary Ann Peltier, a ChoicePoint supervisor, wrote Llibertat Ros, a TeleTech talent acquisition specialist, to inquire about TeleTech's medical marijuana policy. Ros contacted supervisors at corporate headquarters who informed Ros that Tele Tech does not make an exception to its drug policies for medical marijuana use. On October 18, 2006, TeleTech terminated Roe's employment because of her positive drug screening. Roc sued for wrongful termination. Medical Marijuana Law The people of Washington state find that some patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses, under their physician's care, may benefit from the medical use of marijuana. Some of the illnesses for which marijuana appears to be beneficial include chemotherapy- related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients: [acquired immune deficiency syndrome) wasting syndrome, severe muscle spasms associated with multiple sclerosis and other spasticity disorders, epilepsy; acute or chronic glaucoma, and some forms of intractable pain. The people find that humanitarian compassion necessitates that the decision to authorize the medical use of marijuana by patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses is a personal, individual decision, based upon their physician's professional medical judgment and discretion. Therefore, The people of the State of Washington intend that: Qualifying patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses who, in the judgment of their physicians, would benefit from the medical use of marijuana, shall not be found guilty of a crime under state law for their possession and limited use of marijuana; Persons who act as primary caregivers to such patients shall also not be found guilty of a crime under state law for assisting with the medical use of marijuana; and Physicians also be excepted from liability and prosecution for the authorization of marijuana use to qualifying patients for whom, in the physician's professional judgment, medical marijuana may prove beneficial. Wrongful Termination Law Under the common law, employers may generally terminate an at-will employee for any reason or for no reason at all. A narrow exception to the employment at-will doctrine prohibits an employer from discharging an employee for a reason that violates public policy. Roe must meet four elements to state a claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Roe must prove that (1) the existence of a clear public policy (the clarity element); (2) discouraging the conduct in which she engaged would jeopardize the public policy (the jeopardy element); (3) the public policy linked conduct caused her dismissal (the causation element); and (4) Tele Tech cannot offer an overriding justification for her dismissal (the absence of justification element). Instructions: You are an attorney for Jane Roe. Your supervising attorney asked you analyze the facts and the law and write an argument why your client Jane Roe should win her case. Remember, a successful wrongful termination case must meet all (4) elements: (1) the existence of a clear public policy (the clarity element): (2) discouraging the conduct in which she engaged would jeopardize the public policy (the jeopardy element): (3) the public policy linked conduct caused her dismissal (the causation element); and (4) TeleTech cannot offer an overriding justification for her dismissal (the absence of justification element). Re-read the case after reading the instructions and find the facts that will help show your client will win her wrongful termination case. You can make inferences to add to your argument. Your submission should be in a memorandum format, see below. If you have any questions please let your supervising attorney (me, Prof A.) know by sending an email or message on Canvas. Looking forward to reading your Memorandums about your client Jane Roe. MEMORANDUM To: Supervising Attorney From: (Insert your name) Re: ROE V. TELETECH CUSTOMER CARE MANAGEMENT COLORADO LLC Issue: Can Client Jane Roe win her wrongful termination lawsuit against Teletech? Law: Insert wrongful termination law) Argument: (State each one of the elements and provide the facts/inferences that will prove each element) Conclusion: Client Jane Roe will win her wrongful termination case because each one of the wrongful termination elements have been met as outlined above. Inferences: Inferences are conclusions you can draw from the facts. Example: if I said FACT: It is hot outside. You may make the inference conclusion that the sun is out, there are no clouds, the temperature is high, it may be summer, I may be outside, etc. Making inferences mean you read the facts and you can make reasonable conclusions from them