affirming the denial of worker’s compensation benefits, and rejecting expert testimony concerning the inability of a urine test to determine whether marijuana had affected a person’s capacity to function, when the legislature had set no specific testing requirements
How later courts described this case
- affirming the denial of worker’s compensation benefits, and rejecting expert testimony concerning the inability of a urine test to determine whether marijuana had affected a person’s capacity to function, when the legislature had set no specific testing requirements
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Terry Crabtree, Judge, concurring. I concur for the reason stated in my concurrence to Roberson v. Waste Management, 58 Ark. App. 11, 15-16 , 944 S.W.2d 858, 861-62 (1997).