Suspect drug use? Here’s how to build a case
A lawsuit is always a risk when an employee is terminated for a drug and alcohol policy violation, but that risk shouldn’t keep an employer from responding appropriately when a violation occurs.
A recent court case demonstrates how prompt action and a solid investigation can help an employer prevail, even when an employee sues for discrimination and retaliation under multiple laws.
Missing opioids and a dazed nurse
In this case, hospital staff members noticed opioids missing from a controlled room in the intensive care unit. Two nurses reported to a supervisor that medication had been obtained under their credentials, but that they had not taken it out.
The supervisor questioned staff members about the missing drugs. During the investigation, coworkers reported that a nurse with access to the room looked tired, dazed, and out of sorts. It was found that she had accessed the room containing the medication around the time it went missing.
Supervisors asked the nurse to take a drug test and a fitness for duty exam. The test came back positive, but the nurse said the positive result was due to medication she had taken the previous evening for a shingles flare-up.
As the investigation continued, the nurse asked to go home because she was unable to complete the charts she was working on. Before she left, a supervisor told her she was suspended until further notice.
The nurse was later terminated, but the day before her termination, she filed for Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave. The certification form contained only vague information, however.
Claims don’t hold up
The nurse’s numerous claims against the hospital included:
National origin discrimination: The nurse, who described herself as Salvadorian, claimed the hospital discriminated against her and violated her rights under Title VII by not subjecting others on duty to an investigation or fitness for duty exam. The court found, however, that all employees were asked about the missing medication, and she was the only one acting abnormally. Her behavior was the reason for the fitness for duty exam, not her national origin.
She also said that her coworkers made anti-Hispanic comments that impacted the hospital’s investigation. The court found, however, that her termination was based on the results of the investigation, not coworker comments.
The court also noted that the nursing supervisor quickly responded after learning of the missing medication. In addition, because the nurse said she had taken a prescription medication that could have caused a positive drug test, the test was treated as negative.
Disability discrimination: The nurse argued that she was considered disabled and protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because of shingles that caused severe pain. The court found, however, that she didn’t explain how she was limited by this disability and failed to provide a record of impairment.
Family and Medical Leave Act: The nurse’s sparse FMLA certification didn’t show she was entitled to leave, the court found. Her request was processed normally, and she didn’t have enough evidence to show that the hospital fired her in retaliation for filing an FMLA claim.
State anti-discrimination laws: The employee also sued under the Illinois Human Rights Act, but her claims failed because she lost the federal Title VII and ADA claims.
Imperfections don’t derail the case
During its investigation, the hospital made some mistakes. The nurse was allowed to drive home, although hospital policy called for her to be sent home in a cab or go home with a family member. The nurse was also asked to finish her charting work, which was a policy violation.
These mistakes didn’t hurt the employer’s case, however. The court found that the hospital didn’t violate any laws when terminating the employee.
Key to remember: When drug use is suspected, quick action, a thorough investigation, and documentation can help an employer build a solid case that provides a valid reason for actions taken against an employee.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Lohmeier v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, August 14, 2025