Virginia
Medical pot user who lost job after drug test takes case over unemployment to state high court
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont man who lost his job after he said a random drug test showed he had used medical marijuana off duty for chronic pain has appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court saying he should not have been denied a portion of his state unemployment benefits.
Ivo Skoric, 59, representing himself, told the justices Wednesday that he is legally prescribed the medical cannabis by a doctor and his work performance is excellent and not impacted by the medicine. Yet, he said, in January 2023 he was terminated from his job at the Marble Valley Regional Transit District in Rutland for misconduct after a drug test. He said his job was to clean and fuel buses, and he drove them into and out of the garage onto a lot. The misconduct disqualified him from the benefits, according to the state.
A lawyer for the ACLU of Vermont, also representing Criminal Justice Reform, and Disability Rights Vermont, also argued that the benefits should not be denied.
Skoric had appealed to the Vermont Employment Security Board after he was found to be ineligible for state unemployment benefits for the weeks ending January 14, 2023, through February 18, 2023, and his maximum benefit amount was capped at 23 times his weekly benefit, according to the board.
In September 2023, the board agreed with an administrative law judge saying Skoric engaged in conduct prohibited by the employer’s drug and alcohol policy, “exposing him to discipline including termination of his employment,” and that because he was discharged for misconduct he was disqualified from those benefits.
The board wrote that it recognizes that Skoric engaged in conduct that is legal in Vermont and that he had “a legitimate and compelling reason to use medical cannabis for treatment.”
But “employers may set workplace policies that prohibit otherwise legal behavior,” the board wrote, saying that it agreed with the administrative judge that the minimum disqualification is appropriate.
The board later declined Skoric’s request for a declaratory ruling on whether the misconduct disqualification provision applied to the off-duty use of medical cannabis, which he asked the state Supreme Court to review.
Jared Adler, a lawyer representing the Vermont Department of Labor, said the court should affirm the board’s decision because he was discharged for misconduct for violating an acknowledged workplace safety policy and because “Vermont’s drug code does not guarantee unemployment benefits to people who test positive during a random drug screening.”
When asked by a justice if there’s a distinction between consumption and impairment Adler said there is but “there’s no clean way” for an employer to distinguish between consumption and impairment in the case of cannabis because, unlike other drugs, it can exist for an extended period of time in an individual’s system after consuming it. Skoric also said that even though he had used the medical cannabis off-duty, it can show up days later in someone’s system, which makes the testing meaningless.
There’s a balancing test for trying to protect both the public and an employer’s need to conform their policies with federal law, Adler said. Skoric acknowledged his employer received up to 60% of their funding for their business from federal grants, Alder said.
So it was extremely important to ensure that the employer adhere to these federal rules and not risk losing that revenue, Adler said.
Skoric said his position is that “off-duty use of cannabis for state-sanctioned medical purposes cannot and should not be qualified as misconduct by the state.”
South Carolina
Clerk over Alex Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals and gifts, ethics complaint says
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — South Carolina officials have filed 76 counts of ethics violations against the court clerk who handled the Alex Murdaugh murder trial.
The 25 pages of allegations accuse former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill of allowing a photo of Murdaugh in a holding cell to be taken to promote her book on the trial, giving herself bonuses, and using county money to buy dozens of lunches for her staff, prosecutors and a vendor.
Hill also struck a deal with a documentary maker to use the county courtroom in exchange for promoting her book on the trial, which later she admitted had plagiarized passages, according to the South Carolina Ethics Commission complaint earlier this month.
The commission will hold a hearing similar to a trial in December on the accusations unless Hill and her lawyer settle the case before then. Hill could have to reimburse the expenses and face thousands of dollars or more in fines. And if the commission thinks she broke any laws, they can forward the information to prosecutors.
A criminal investigation into whether Hill tampered with the Murdaugh jury or misused her office continues, the State Law Enforcement Division said Thursday.
Hill resigned in March during the last year of her four year term, citing the public scrutiny of Murdaugh’s trial and wanting to spend time with her grandchildren. She hasn’t publicly addressed the ethics allegations and her lawyer didn’t return a message Thursday.
Murdaugh was convicted of killing his wife and younger son after a six-week trial in Colleton County last year.
Murdaugh is appealing his conviction and life without parole sentence in part accusing Hill of trying to influence jurors to vote guilty and being biased against Murdaugh for her book. Murdaugh is also serving decades in prison for admitting to stealing millions of dollars from settlements for clients who suffered horrible injuries or deaths and from his family’s law firm.
An initial appeal was denied, but the judge said she wasn’t sure Hill told the truth about her dealings with jurors and was “attracted by the siren call of celebrity.”
The ethics allegations against Hill say she bought lunches for prosecutors and then paid herself back with county money.
None of the allegations mention spending for public defenders or defense attorneys.
Hill gave herself nearly $10,000 in bonuses from federal money that is meant to improve child support collection but has few rules on how it is spent, according to the complaint.
The former clerk used public money to buy meals for her staff, her family, judges, court employees and others 36 times.
In all, Hill is accused of spending nearly $20,000 in county money in ways she shouldn’t, according to the complaint.
Medical pot user who lost job after drug test takes case over unemployment to state high court
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont man who lost his job after he said a random drug test showed he had used medical marijuana off duty for chronic pain has appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court saying he should not have been denied a portion of his state unemployment benefits.
Ivo Skoric, 59, representing himself, told the justices Wednesday that he is legally prescribed the medical cannabis by a doctor and his work performance is excellent and not impacted by the medicine. Yet, he said, in January 2023 he was terminated from his job at the Marble Valley Regional Transit District in Rutland for misconduct after a drug test. He said his job was to clean and fuel buses, and he drove them into and out of the garage onto a lot. The misconduct disqualified him from the benefits, according to the state.
A lawyer for the ACLU of Vermont, also representing Criminal Justice Reform, and Disability Rights Vermont, also argued that the benefits should not be denied.
Skoric had appealed to the Vermont Employment Security Board after he was found to be ineligible for state unemployment benefits for the weeks ending January 14, 2023, through February 18, 2023, and his maximum benefit amount was capped at 23 times his weekly benefit, according to the board.
In September 2023, the board agreed with an administrative law judge saying Skoric engaged in conduct prohibited by the employer’s drug and alcohol policy, “exposing him to discipline including termination of his employment,” and that because he was discharged for misconduct he was disqualified from those benefits.
The board wrote that it recognizes that Skoric engaged in conduct that is legal in Vermont and that he had “a legitimate and compelling reason to use medical cannabis for treatment.”
But “employers may set workplace policies that prohibit otherwise legal behavior,” the board wrote, saying that it agreed with the administrative judge that the minimum disqualification is appropriate.
The board later declined Skoric’s request for a declaratory ruling on whether the misconduct disqualification provision applied to the off-duty use of medical cannabis, which he asked the state Supreme Court to review.
Jared Adler, a lawyer representing the Vermont Department of Labor, said the court should affirm the board’s decision because he was discharged for misconduct for violating an acknowledged workplace safety policy and because “Vermont’s drug code does not guarantee unemployment benefits to people who test positive during a random drug screening.”
When asked by a justice if there’s a distinction between consumption and impairment Adler said there is but “there’s no clean way” for an employer to distinguish between consumption and impairment in the case of cannabis because, unlike other drugs, it can exist for an extended period of time in an individual’s system after consuming it. Skoric also said that even though he had used the medical cannabis off-duty, it can show up days later in someone’s system, which makes the testing meaningless.
There’s a balancing test for trying to protect both the public and an employer’s need to conform their policies with federal law, Adler said. Skoric acknowledged his employer received up to 60% of their funding for their business from federal grants, Alder said.
So it was extremely important to ensure that the employer adhere to these federal rules and not risk losing that revenue, Adler said.
Skoric said his position is that “off-duty use of cannabis for state-sanctioned medical purposes cannot and should not be qualified as misconduct by the state.”
South Carolina
Clerk over Alex Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals and gifts, ethics complaint says
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — South Carolina officials have filed 76 counts of ethics violations against the court clerk who handled the Alex Murdaugh murder trial.
The 25 pages of allegations accuse former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill of allowing a photo of Murdaugh in a holding cell to be taken to promote her book on the trial, giving herself bonuses, and using county money to buy dozens of lunches for her staff, prosecutors and a vendor.
Hill also struck a deal with a documentary maker to use the county courtroom in exchange for promoting her book on the trial, which later she admitted had plagiarized passages, according to the South Carolina Ethics Commission complaint earlier this month.
The commission will hold a hearing similar to a trial in December on the accusations unless Hill and her lawyer settle the case before then. Hill could have to reimburse the expenses and face thousands of dollars or more in fines. And if the commission thinks she broke any laws, they can forward the information to prosecutors.
A criminal investigation into whether Hill tampered with the Murdaugh jury or misused her office continues, the State Law Enforcement Division said Thursday.
Hill resigned in March during the last year of her four year term, citing the public scrutiny of Murdaugh’s trial and wanting to spend time with her grandchildren. She hasn’t publicly addressed the ethics allegations and her lawyer didn’t return a message Thursday.
Murdaugh was convicted of killing his wife and younger son after a six-week trial in Colleton County last year.
Murdaugh is appealing his conviction and life without parole sentence in part accusing Hill of trying to influence jurors to vote guilty and being biased against Murdaugh for her book. Murdaugh is also serving decades in prison for admitting to stealing millions of dollars from settlements for clients who suffered horrible injuries or deaths and from his family’s law firm.
An initial appeal was denied, but the judge said she wasn’t sure Hill told the truth about her dealings with jurors and was “attracted by the siren call of celebrity.”
The ethics allegations against Hill say she bought lunches for prosecutors and then paid herself back with county money.
None of the allegations mention spending for public defenders or defense attorneys.
Hill gave herself nearly $10,000 in bonuses from federal money that is meant to improve child support collection but has few rules on how it is spent, according to the complaint.
The former clerk used public money to buy meals for her staff, her family, judges, court employees and others 36 times.
In all, Hill is accused of spending nearly $20,000 in county money in ways she shouldn’t, according to the complaint.
