As cannabis legalization spreads across the United States, it’s creating new challenges in the realm of personal injury law.
From vehicle accidents to workplace injuries, the presence of cannabis adds a layer of complexity to cases that were once more straightforward to litigate.
One of the primary concerns in cannabis-related personal injury cases is determining impairment because unlike alcohol, where blood alcohol content provides a clear measure, there’s no universally accepted standard for cannabis impairment. This ambiguity can complicate liability in accidents where cannabis use is a factor.
“There has been an increase in cases where cannabis use is a factor,” according to Chris Mova, founder of the Californian personal injury law firm Mova Law Group.
The challenge lies in proving or disproving impairment, as current testing methods can only show the presence of THC, not necessarily active impairment.
Another emerging issue is the intersection of cannabis use and workers’ compensation claims. In states where cannabis is legal, either medically or recreationally, employers and insurance companies are grappling with how to handle injuries involving employees who use cannabis, even if it’s off-duty.
Product liability is yet another area where cannabis legalization is having an impact. As the cannabis industry grows, so does the potential for product-related injuries. From mislabeled edibles to vaping-related illnesses, these cases present unique challenges in establishing liability and causation.
Mova emphasizes the importance of staying ahead of these trends: “As personal injury lawyers, we need to be proactive in understanding the scientific and legal aspects of cannabis use. This includes keeping up with the latest research on impairment testing and the potential long-term effects of cannabis use.”
The legal landscape is still catching up to the reality of widespread cannabis use. Many states are in the process of updating their laws and regulations to address these new challenges. For instance, some states are considering implementing per se limits for THC in drivers’ blood, similar to blood alcohol limits.
However, these efforts are complicated by the lack of scientific consensus on what constitutes cannabis impairment. Unlike alcohol, THC can remain in a user’s system long after the impairing effects have worn off, making it difficult to establish a clear link between the presence of THC and actual impairment at the time of an incident.
For individuals, the key takeaway is clear: while cannabis may be legal in many states, its use can still have significant legal implications in the event of an accident or injury. As with alcohol, responsible use and clear understanding of the potential consequences are crucial.
