August 2024 Coach's Quiz

QUESTION #1

A private—that is, non-federally funded—landlord in California, which has legalized both medical and recreational use marijuana, catches two tenants smoking pot in the clubhouse in violation of the community’s anti-drug use policy. Tenant A has a valid prescription from a physician to use marijuana to treat his PTSD; Tenant B is just a casual user. With medical and recreational marijuana both legal in the state, which, if any, tenant(s) can the landlord evict for violating the community's anti-drug policy?

a.         Tenant A

b.         Tenant B

c.          Both

d.         Neither

QUESTION #2

Your apartment community has a strictly enforced no-smoking policy. A rental prospect discloses that she has a valid prescription from a physician to use marijuana for cancer and requests a reasonable accommodation allowing her to smoke the product in her apartment. What should you do?

a.         Ignore her request because there’s no basis for granting the accommodation

b.         Reject the request because the requested accommodation is unreasonable

c.          Require the applicant to verify that she really has cancer

d.         Reject the request but only after ruling out the possibility of her consuming the marijuana she needs in a smoke-free form

COACH’S ANSWERS & EXPLANATIONS

QUESTION #1

Correct answer: c

Reason: Rules #1, #4 and #8 apply here:

Rule #1: Adopt Reasonable Ban on Illegal Marijuana Use

Rule #4: Accommodate Only Medical & Not Recreational Marijuana

Rule #8: Impose Reasonable Limitations on Permitted Medical Marijuana Use

Just because your state has passed marijuana legalization legislation doesn’t mean tenants can use the product whenever and wherever they want. Landlords may still adopt restrictions, including the requirement that tenants use marijuana only within their own apartments and not in common areas. Since both tenants in this scenario have run afoul of this rule, you have grounds to evict both. So, c. is the right answer. 

Wrong answers explained:

a. is wrong because state medical marijuana laws legalize the product but allow for restrictions on consumption in public, including in the clubhouse of an apartment community.

b. is wrong for the same reason that a. is wrong plus the fact that a landlord’s duty to make reasonable accommodations for legal marijuana use applies only to medical and not to recreational marijuana use.

QUESTION #2

Correct answer: d

Reason: Rules #3, #7 & #9 apply here:

Rule #3: Promptly Respond to All Accommodation Requests

Rule #7: Determine If Requested Medical Marijuana Accommodation Is Reasonable

Rule #9: Stick to Your Smoke-Free Policy but Explore Smoke-Free Alternatives

While no reported case has specifically addressed the issue, the current consensus among legal experts is that a landlord wouldn’t have to make an exemption to a strictly and consistently enforced smoke-free policy to accommodate smoking of legal medical marijuana. In other words, if you don’t permit tobacco smoking, you don’t have to permit marijuana smoking. However, that’s not necessarily the end of the inquiry. There may still be reasonable alternative accommodations you could make, such as allowing the applicant to consume the medical marijuana she needs as an edible, pill, or other non-smoke form. Only after you rule out those alternatives can you conclude that the requested accommodation is unreasonable. So, d. is the right answer.  

Wrong answers explained:

a. is wrong because you should never ignore an accommodations request, even if you believe it lacks merit. In addition, HUD/DOJ guidelines make it clear that landlords must respond promptly and that failure to do so is tantamount to a rejection.

b. is wrong because while making an exemption from a smoke-free policy would likely be deemed unreasonable, you still need to consider the possibility of reasonable alternatives before rejecting the request.

c. is wrong because for all intents and purposes, a valid prescription for medical marijuana from a physician is verification that the applicant has the particular disability for which the product has been prescribed and needs it to treat the condition.