Inadmissible Drug Test May Not Be Used to Show Employee Fraud in Louisiana

In Louisiana, a positive drug test following a work-related injury may not be offered as evidence that the injured worker’s injuries were the result of intoxication at the time of the injury unless the test is verified or confirmed according to the requirements set forth in La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1081. The Supreme Court of Louisiana recently held that in such cases, it would also be improper to allow the employer to utilize the inadmissible drug test to establish a fraud defense under La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1208 [Parson v. Truck Parts & Equip., Inc., 2019-00743 (La. 10/01/19), 2019 La. LEXIS 2437 (Oct. 1, 2019)]. Accordingly, a state appellate court erred when it reversed a ruling by the OWC judge that had granted the employee’s motion in limine as to an unconfirmed drug test.

Background

Claimant sustained injuries in a work-related accident at his employer’s facility. A drug test administered the following day came back positive. No confirmation testing, however, was performed. Claimant sought workers’ compensation benefits and the employer disputed the claim, contending that the injuries resulted from drug intoxication. The OWC judge granted claimant’s motion for summary judgment, finding the drug test was inadmissible, but refused to strike it from the record. Concerned that his employer would attempt to use the unconfirmed drug test to mount a fraud defense under La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1208, claimant filed a motion in limine. After consideration of the issues, the OWC judge granted the motion.

A divided court of appeal reversed the ruling of the OWC judge, holding the confirmation requirements contained in La. Rev. Stat. § 23:1081 applied only to the issue of whether the drug test should be admitted to prove an intoxication defense. The court said the statute did not provide for the exclusion of the unconfirmed drug test for purposes of the fraud defense. Rather, the use of such evidence went to the weight and not the admissibility of the evidence.

Supreme Court Disagrees

The high court disagreed. The Court stated:

Given the gravity of denying compensation benefits to an injured worker, the evidence used to prove disqualification or forfeiture of those benefits must be deemed competent. It is undisputed that unconfirmed drug test results cannot be used as a basis for disqualification pursuant to La. R.S. 23:1081. It would be illogical to prohibit the unconfirmed drug test to be used to deny a claimant benefits under § 1081, yet allow the same unconfirmed [drug] test to be used as proof of fraud to ban a claimant’s benefits under §1208. The unconfirmed test results are equally unreliable in both circumstances [Opinion, pg. 3].