(a) For the purposes of this section:
(1) “Action” has the meaning provided in section 47a-1;
(2) “Dwelling unit” has the meaning provided in section 47a-1;
(3) “Employer” means a person engaged in business who has one or more employees, including the state and any political subdivision of the state;
(4) “Landlord” has the meaning provided in section 47a-1;
(5) “Palliative use” has the meaning provided in section 21a-408;
(6) “Caregiver” has the meaning provided in section 21a-408;
(7) “Qualifying patient” has the meaning provided in section 21a-408;
(8) “School” means a public or private elementary or secondary school in this state or a public or private institution of higher education in this state; and
(9) “Tenant” has the meaning provided in section 47a-1.
(b) Unless required by federal law or required to obtain federal funding:
(1) No school may refuse to enroll any person or discriminate against any student solely on the basis of such person's or student's status as a qualifying patient or caregiver under sections 21a-408 to 21a-408m, inclusive;
(2) No landlord may refuse to rent a dwelling unit to a person or take action against a tenant solely on the basis of such person's or tenant's status as a qualifying patient or caregiver under sections 21a-408 to 21a-408m, inclusive; and
(3) No employer may refuse to hire a person or may discharge, penalize or threaten an employee solely on the basis of such person's or employee's status as a qualifying patient or caregiver under sections 21a-408 to 21a-408m, inclusive. Nothing in this subdivision shall restrict an employer's ability to prohibit the use of intoxicating substances during work hours or restrict an employer's ability to discipline an employee for being under the influence of intoxicating substances during work hours.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the palliative use of marijuana in violation of subsection (b) of section 21a-408a.
(P.A. 12-55, S. 17; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 21-1, S. 77.)
History: June Sp. Sess. P.A. 21-1 amended Subsec. (a) by changing the defined term from “primary caregiver” to “caregiver” in Subdiv. (6) and amended Subsec. (b) by replacing references to “primary caregiver” with “caregiver” and replacing “21-408n” with “21a-408m”, effective July 1, 2021.
Notes of Decisions
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 273 F. Supp. 3d 326 (D. Conn. 2017).
· cites it 30× “But plaintiff correctly notes that while other sections of PUMA assign administrative authority to the Department of Consumer *341 Protection, the text of § 21a-408p is a clear exception. See Doe.”
Bartolotta v. Human Resources Agency of New Britain, Inc., 224 Conn. App. 248 (Conn. App. Ct. 2024).
· cites it 14× “Her complaint contains four counts and alleges (1) disability discrimination in violation of General Statutes § 46a-60 (b) (1), (2) failure to accommodate, (3) a violation of General Statutes § 21a-408p, and (4) a violation of General Statutes § 31- 51x.”
Waterbury v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 216 Conn. App. 717 (Conn. App. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 27× “On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the board (1) erred in finding the Palliative Use of Marijuana Act (PUMA); see General Statutes § 21a-408 et seq.;1 and specifically General Statutes § 21a-408p,2 applicable to the present case, and (2) erro- neously concluded that the…”
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 338 F. Supp. 3d 78 (D. Conn. 2018).
· cites it 12× “Defendant states that it adopted its substance abuse policy in order to comply with the DFWA, such that any actions it takes in accordance with that policy are outside the scope of liability under § 21a-408p. I do not agree that the DFWA required defendant to rescind plaintiff's…”
Jones v. Acuren Inspection, Inc. (D. Conn. 2024).
· cites it 2× “Lastly, Acuren argues that refusing to allow an employer to consume medical marijuana cannot be the basis for a disability discrimination claim under CFEPA because it can only be brought under the Palliative Use of Marijuana Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-408p (“PUMA”) (Mr.”
Hudnell v. Thomas Jefferson Univ. Hosp. (E.D. Pa. 2020).
“” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-408p(b)(3). 3 “[A|Jn employer may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination, or any term or condition of employment .”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-408p(b) — 3 cases
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 273 F. Supp. 3d 326 (D. Conn. 2017).
“But plaintiff correctly notes that while other sections of PUMA assign administrative authority to the Department of Consumer *341 Protection, the text of § 21a-408p is a clear exception. See Doe.”
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 338 F. Supp. 3d 78 (D. Conn. 2018).
“Defendant states that it adopted its substance abuse policy in order to comply with the DFWA, such that any actions it takes in accordance with that policy are outside the scope of liability under § 21a-408p. I do not agree that the DFWA required defendant to rescind plaintiff's…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 21a-408p(b)(3) — 7 cases
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 273 F. Supp. 3d 326 (D. Conn. 2017).
“But plaintiff correctly notes that while other sections of PUMA assign administrative authority to the Department of Consumer *341 Protection, the text of § 21a-408p is a clear exception. See Doe.”
Noffsinger v. SSC Niantic Operating Co., 338 F. Supp. 3d 78 (D. Conn. 2018).
“Defendant states that it adopted its substance abuse policy in order to comply with the DFWA, such that any actions it takes in accordance with that policy are outside the scope of liability under § 21a-408p. I do not agree that the DFWA required defendant to rescind plaintiff's…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.