Utah Code

Utah Code § 34-38-10 (2026)

A cause of action does not arise against employer unless inaccurate test result -- Presumption and limitation of damages in claim against employer

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A cause of action may not arise in favor of a person against an employer who establishes a program of drug or alcohol testing in accordance with this chapter, and who takes an action under Section 34-38-8, unless the employer takes the action on the basis of an inaccurate test result.

If a person bringing a claim, including a claim under Section 34-38-11, alleges that an employer's action is based on an inaccurate test result:

there is a rebuttable presumption that the test result is valid if the employer complies with Section 34-38-6; and

the employer is not liable for monetary damages if the employer's reliance on an inaccurate test result is reasonable and in good faith.

There is a rebuttable presumption that the employer complies with Section 34-38-6 if as part of the employer's drug and alcohol testing program a licensed physician who is trained in the interpretation of drug and alcohol test results:

provides medical assessment of a result that indicates a failed test;

requests re-analysis of a test result if necessary; and

makes a determination whether or not alcohol or other drug use has occurred.

A court may find that an employer complies with Section 34-38-6 notwithstanding that the employer's drug and alcohol testing program does not include an action described in Subsection (3)(a).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1989–1989 · leading case: Grace Drilling Co. v. Bd. of Review, 776 P.2d 63 (Utah Ct. App. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Grace Drilling Co. v. Bd. of Review, 776 P.2d 63 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 3× “§ 34-38-10 (2)(a) (1988), which creates a rebuttable presumption in favor of the employer that drug test results are valid so long as certain testing procedure criteria are met as specified in § 34-38-6. 8 For purposes of discussion, we assume without deciding that the Utah Drug…”

— Utah Code § 34-38-10(2)(a) — 1 case

Grace Drilling Co. v. Bd. of Review, 776 P.2d 63 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). “§ 34-38-10 (2)(a) (1988), which creates a rebuttable presumption in favor of the employer that drug test results are valid so long as certain testing procedure criteria are met as specified in § 34-38-6. 8 For purposes of discussion, we assume without deciding that the Utah Drug…”

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.