A Louisiana appellate court has reinstated the termination of a Baton Rouge fire captain who tested positive for marijuana during a random drug test, reversing a district court decision that had ordered his reinstatement.

Fire Captain Todd David had served with the Baton Rouge Fire Department for 22 years and held permanent status in the municipal civil service system. On September 14, 2022, he was selected for a random drug test conducted pursuant to the Baton Rouge Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board’s Drug-Free Workplace Ordinance. The test returned a verified positive result for a marijuana metabolite. At the time of the test, Captain David had a physician’s recommendation for the therapeutic use of marijuana for post-traumatic stress disorder and chronic pain.

The Fire and Police Civil Service Board’s Drug-Free Workplace Ordinance prohibited employees from reporting to work with sufficient amounts of a drug or its metabolite in their systems to produce a positive test result. The ordinance also provided a rehabilitation option for employees who tested positive. However, employees were limited to a single rehabilitation agreement during their City-Parish employment. Captain David had previously tested positive for marijuana in 1999 and entered into a rehabilitation agreement at that time.

Following the 2022 test, Fire Chief Michael J. Kimble notified Captain David that the department was considering termination and conducted a pre-termination hearing. During the hearing, Captain David explained that he used medical marijuana based on a physician’s recommendation related to PTSD-related sleep issues. Following the hearing, Chief Kimble terminated Captain David’s employment, citing violations of the Fire and Police Board’s Drug-Free Ordinance and Louisiana civil service statutes. The termination letter emphasized the “safety-sensitive nature” of the captain’s position and the fact that he had already utilized the ordinance’s one-time rehabilitation option.

Captain David appealed to the Baton Rouge Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board. He argued that he was unaware of the Fire and Police Board’s ordinance and believed the City-Parish’s Drug-Free Workforce Ordinance that allowed the use of controlled substances when supported by a valid prescription was applicable. He also contended that the Fire and Police Board’s ordinance was difficult to locate and was not included in materials he reviewed. The fire department responded that Captain David’s 1999 rehabilitation agreement specifically referenced the Fire and Police Board’s ordinance and that the ordinance governing fire and police personnel differed from the general City-Parish ordinance applicable to other employees.

After a hearing, the Board upheld the termination and found that the discipline was commensurate with the offense. The Board also found that the evidence established the alleged violations had occurred and that the department acted in good faith and for cause. Among its findings, the Board noted that Captain David had received a verified positive test result and had previously entered into a rehabilitation agreement in 1999.

Captain David then sought judicial review in district court. With new counsel, he advanced a different argument, contending that the department had failed to establish a “positive test” as defined by the ordinance. Under the ordinance, a positive test required not only the presence of a drug or metabolite above specified cutoff levels, but also a determination by a medical review officer that there was “no legitimate explanation” for its presence. Captain David argued that the department had not proven that element.

The district court agreed and overturned the Board’s decision, concluding that the Board’s action was arbitrary and capricious. The court ordered Captain David reinstated to his former position.

The Baton Rouge Fire Department appealed. The Louisiana First Circuit converted the appeal into an application for supervisory writs and reviewed the merits of the case. The court noted that, during the Board hearing, the parties had stipulated that they would “not dispute the legitimacy of the verified positive drug test and/or the medical marijuana prescription.” The court further noted that Captain David had not challenged the existence of a positive test before the Board and instead focused on whether he understood that his marijuana use could jeopardize his employment.

The appellate court concluded that the district court exceeded its authority in two respects. First, it considered an argument that had not been presented to the Board. Second, it failed to apply the proper standard of review. The court explained that the issue was not whether it would independently reach the same conclusion as the Board, but whether the evidence in the administrative record reasonably supported the Board’s determination that the department acted in good faith and for cause.

The court found that the record established that Captain David occupied a safety-sensitive position, was subject to the Fire and Police Board’s Drug-Free Workplace Ordinance, had a verified positive drug test, and had previously entered into a rehabilitation agreement that made him ineligible for another one. The court concluded that the Board reasonably determined that those facts supported termination.

The district court’s judgment was thusly reversed, and the Civil Service Board’s decision upholding Captain David’s termination was reinstated.