[[{“value”:”
The U.S. Supreme Court this week heard arguments related to a lawsuit filed by a truck driver who failed a drug test for THC after using a CBD supplement advertised as THC-free. Douglas Horn is suing Medical Marijuana Inc., the maker of Dixie X, a “CBD-Rich Medicine,” for lost wages, according to a report from USA Today. Horn alleges that he unwittingly consumed THC, the primary psychoactive component of marijuana, when he used the CBD product, leading to a failed drug test and the loss of his job, insurance and benefits.
Horn filed suit against Medical Marijuana Inc and companies involved in distributing the CBD product under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, a statute that was created to address organized crime. Plaintiffs who sue under the act are required to demonstrate a pattern of illegal activity and that such activities caused injury to a property or business. Successful RICO suits can be lucrative, with plaintiffs collecting triple damages.
In 1981, the Supreme Court expanded its interpretation of the legislation to include both legitimate and illegitimate enterprises, leading to a significant increase in RICO cases filed in the federal courts. Since then, the court has attempted to narrow the scope of the statute.
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Horn’s case to determine if he can sue under the RICO statute. Medical Marijuana Inc. is arguing that RICO does not apply to the case because any injury caused by the CBD elixir was personal, rather than a business injury.
“It is a physical, chemical, bodily invasion,” Lisa Blatt, an attorney representing Medical Marijuana Inc. and companies involved in distribution of the product, said about Horn’s allegation. “To me, that’s a physical injury.”
During oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that RICO’s exclusion of personal injuries is designed to limit its applicability. Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked if Horn was portraying a personal injury as an injury to his business, saying the position is a “dramatic, really radical shift in how tort shifts are brought throughout the United States.” Justice Elena Kagan, however, appeared to dispute the notion that Horn’s injury was purely personal.
“If you’re harmed when you lose a job, then you’ve been injured in your business, haven’t you?” Kagan asked the lawyer representing the businesses, CNN reported. Kagan added that the law “just says if you’ve been injured by a RICO violation in your business, which includes your employment, then you’re entitled to threefold damages.”
Easha Anand, an attorney for Horn, told the court that RICO applies because Horn lost his job.
“We think being fired is a classic injury to business,” Easha Anand, an attorney for Horn, told the Supreme Court. “You can no longer carry out your livelihood.”
Anand also noted that plaintiffs in RICO cases cannot sue for pain and suffering, which generally constitute the bulk of damages awarded in personal injury cases.
“Defendants have come to this court for decades and said, ‘The sky is going to fall if you interpret RICO the way its text literally says it should be interpreted,’” she said. “The sky hasn’t fallen.”
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York agreed with Horn and ruled he can sue under the RICO Act. The Supreme Court’s decision on the case is expected next year.
“}]] The U.S. Supreme Court this week heard arguments in a lawsuit filed by a trucker who failed a drug test for THC after using a CBD supplement advertised as THC-free. Read More