Tenn. Supreme Court Rules Marijuana Not a Factor in Worker's Injury
Southeast News • July 9, 2007
The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that a worker whose hand was crushed by machinery at his workplace was not to blame for the accident despite his admitted marijuana use off the job.
Billy ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Illegal vs. legal or witness testimony vs. e
Posted On: July 10, 2007, 8:57 am CDT
Posted By: Ol Man Of The Mountain
Comment:
C'mon, Fred, Your comment that "idiot adjusters try to get out of paying the claim" is totally offbase. Everyone is always trying to "shoot the messenger". The claims adjusters collect the "facts" and report (messages) to the companies. Company management and their defense attorneys then make the decisions to pay or deny. Adjuster's are not attorneys....they cannot go into courts and file petitions in suits to deny claims.
In this particular court case, the experienced worker training the new hire was probably NOT under the influence of marijuana smoked the night before, or several days before, therefore properly received his benefits due him by order of the court. As a 40 year claims adjuster, I'm glad to see the court put this apparent overzealous workers comp carrier in its place, knowing that marijuana stays in your bloodstream (or urine) for up to 4 weeks, more or less.
My previous post's intent is to show how setting a precedence, without knowing ALL the facts in the case, could cause many workers around the country to misinterpret the courts findings, therefore taking a cavalier attitude about their own accountability and show up at work with .8 or more alcohol in their blood and cause their own injuries at their jobs. They are accountable for their own actions when they are around machinery which carries manufacturer's warning labels: "don't operate this machinery if you are under the influence of medications", or similar words to that effect. These warnings implicitly apply to illegal drugs, as well.
Claims adjusters are also accountable to state insurance regulators and national industry associations, by requiring them to adhere to strict rules of ethics in handling claims. As in all professions, there are a few bad apples out there that gives a black-eye to the insurance profession. But, I'll bet that they are fewer in number than the number of policyholders who try to rip off their own insurance company.
When uninformed people post their non-sensical comments about legal issues without knowing all the facts, they have a very infuential way of misleading the public who reads these posts. If you want to know what the court's thinking wss in arriving at their conclusion, go to the Tennessee Supreme Courts cases on their internet web-site and READ for yourselves.
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Illegal vs. legal or witness testimony vs. e
In this particular court case, the experienced worker training the new hire was probably NOT under the influence of marijuana smoked the night before, or several days before, therefore properly received his benefits due him by order of the court. As a 40 year claims adjuster, I'm glad to see the court put this apparent overzealous workers comp carrier in its place, knowing that marijuana stays in your bloodstream (or urine) for up to 4 weeks, more or less.
My previous post's intent is to show how setting a precedence, without knowing ALL the facts in the case, could cause many workers around the country to misinterpret the courts findings, therefore taking a cavalier attitude about their own accountability and show up at work with .8 or more alcohol in their blood and cause their own injuries at their jobs. They are accountable for their own actions when they are around machinery which carries manufacturer's warning labels: "don't operate this machinery if you are under the influence of medications", or similar words to that effect. These warnings implicitly apply to illegal drugs, as well.
Claims adjusters are also accountable to state insurance regulators and national industry associations, by requiring them to adhere to strict rules of ethics in handling claims. As in all professions, there are a few bad apples out there that gives a black-eye to the insurance profession. But, I'll bet that they are fewer in number than the number of policyholders who try to rip off their own insurance company.
When uninformed people post their non-sensical comments about legal issues without knowing all the facts, they have a very infuential way of misleading the public who reads these posts. If you want to know what the court's thinking wss in arriving at their conclusion, go to the Tennessee Supreme Courts cases on their internet web-site and READ for yourselves.