Randisi & Associates

Pre-Employment Screening Specialists

RANDISI & ASSOCIATES, INC.

410.336.0287
Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
    • Background Investigations
    • Drug & Alcohol Testing
      • Urine Specimen
      • Oral Fluid Testing
    • QuickApp and QuickApp Pro
  • About Us
    • Why Randisi Associates, Inc.?
    • Testimonials
    • Testimonials in Chesapeake Human Resources
    • Privacy Policy
    • Consumers
  • Resources
    • Marijuana in the Workplace
    • Employment Screening & Drug Testing
    • Negligent Referrals?
    • Interview with Larry Wilner
    • Drug Testing Seminars
  • Partners
  • News
    • Background Checks
    • Business Success
    • Drug Testing
    • Personnel Management
    • Employment News
  • Request A Quote
  • Contact Us
  • Client Login
    • CRL Order Form
  • Payment
You are here: Home / Drug Testing / Positive Drug Test Defeats ADA Claim.

Positive Drug Test Defeats ADA Claim.

March 16, 2026 By Jim Randisi

This article from Vital Law discusses a physician’s failed attempt to show he was discharged because of an ADA claim violation. Hospital’s adherence to substance abuse policy forecloses inference that prior substance abuse disorder caused discharge due to an ADA claim.

A hospital did not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it terminated its medical director of anesthesia following a certified positive drug test, a federal court in Indiana determined. Granting the hospital’s motion for summary judgment and denying the physician’s cross-motion, the court concluded that the record lacked evidence from which a factfinder could determine that disability was a but-for cause of the termination. No reasonable jury, the court concluded, could find that the physician was discharged because of his prior substance abuse disorder rather than pursuant to the hospital’s substance abuse policy (Carter v. The Health and Hospital Corporation of Johnson County, No. 1:23-cv-01048-SEB-MKK (S.D. Ind. Feb. 11, 2026)).

The physician was hired in October 2020 as medical director of anesthesia and a practicing anesthesiologist at Johnson Memorial Hospital. During the hiring process, the physician disclosed that he had received treatment approximately seven years earlier for a substance abuse disorder and had remained sober since that time.

In September 2021, the hospital conducted a department-wide audit of controlled substances after identifying discrepancies between the amounts of narcotics anesthesia providers had withdrawn from the automated dispensing system and the amounts documented as administered to patients or properly wasted.

The audit caused the hospital to drug test the doctor. The physician’s test was reported as “non-negative” and was sent for confirmation. Confirmatory testing detected hydromorphone above the screening cutoff level.

The hospital’s substance abuse policy provided that drug tests were to be reviewed by a medical review officer, defined as a licensed physician designated by hospital administration with appropriate medical training to evaluate positive test results and determine whether there was a legitimate medical explanation. If the medical review officer determined that no legitimate explanation existed beyond unauthorized drug use, the policy stated that employees with verified positive test results would be discharged. [R&A Comment – We discuss the importance of a medial review officer in your drug testing program here.]

The physician did not dispute the accuracy of the laboratory findings themselves but instead challenged the medical review officer’s interpretation of those findings.

The physician filed suit after receiving a right-to-sue notice from the EEOC, alleging that the hospital terminated him because of his prior substance abuse disorder in violation of the ADA. He argued that the hospital’s reliance on the certified positive drug test was a pretext for discrimination, while the hospital maintained that it acted pursuant to its substance abuse policy following the medical review officer’s final determination. In assessing the physician’s ADA claim, the court explained that the central inquiry was whether the evidence would allow a reasonable factfinder to conclude that disability caused the termination.

The court found that, even assuming the prior substance abuse disorder qualified as a disability and that the physician was otherwise qualified for his position, there was no evidence that the termination occurred because of that disability.

James P. Randisi, President of Randisi & Associates, Inc., has been helping employers protect their clients, workforce and reputation through implementation of employment screening and drug testing programs since 1999. This post does not constitute legal advice. Randisi & Associates, Inc. is not a law firm. Always contact competent employment legal counsel. To learn more about the rights of employees who test positive for marijuana, Mr. Randisi can be contacted by phone at 410.336.0287 or Email: info@randisiandassociates.com or the website at Randisiandassociates.com

Filed Under: Drug Testing

Testimonials

Video testimonial from Rebecca Yarrison Miller's Minuteman Press Owings … Read More>>

Latest News

  • Positive Drug Test Defeats ADA Claim.
  • What Background Checks Miss
  • The One Word to Describe What You Do for Your Customers
  • Federal Workplace Drug Testing Rules Aren’t Changing
  • Why Does an Investigation Report from a Consumer Reporting Agency Take Long to Complete

Afilliate Organizations

Tazworks NAPBS

Request A Quote

How can we Randisi and Associates assist your organization with background checks, drug testing and pre-employment screening?


CLICK HERE to Request a Quote or Consultation

Contact Us

Phone: 410.336.0287
Fax: 410.296.6131

1202 Fieldbrook Circle
York PA 17404
Contact Us

PRIVACY POLICY

©2025 Randisi & Associates, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Site by SPARKS!

We use cookies to make sure you get the best experience on our website. You can learn more by viewing our Privacy Statement.AcceptPrivacy Policy