ADA and NJLAD determination of disability for current drug user applies broad interpretation of period of usage.

After being arrested for possession of cocaine while driving a Township vehicle and while on paid working time, the plaintiff claimed that she was disabled and entitled to accommodation in the form of a leave of absence to attend a drug treatment program. The Township terminated her employment, claiming she was not entitled to the statutory protections since she was a present drug user. In denying the Township’s motion to dismiss the complaint, Judge Martinotti held that, while the ADA Interpretative Guide called for a broad definition of “currently engaging,” the issue was still one of fact as to whether the plaintiff was an active drug user at the time of the request and this factual dispute precluded dismissal of the action.

_{Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2017}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2017 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}