The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether a company's failure to accommodate an employee's medical marijuana usage provides the basis for a discrimination claim.

The court said Tuesday it will hear Wild v. Carriage Funeral Holdings, in which a funeral director was fired after his employer discovered he was using medical marijuana as part of his cancer treatment. The case raises the issue of whether an employer is required to accommodate the use of medical marijuana as allowed under the state's Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act.

In the case before the court, plaintiff Justin Wild claimed he was discriminated against for using medical marijuana as part of his medical treatment.

After he was involved in a minor car crash in 2016 during the course of his employment, Wild was taken to an emergency room, where he told hospital staff he was using medical marijuana. Wild was not at fault for the crash.

His employer learned of his marijuana usage because it was considered work-related. After he was ordered to take a drug test, Wild was fired for violating a company policy requiring employees to tell their supervisor if they are using any medication that may impact their ability to safely perform their duties.

Wild claimed in a suit that he was unlawfully discriminated against for using medical marijuana as permitted by the Compassionate Use Act. But a trial judge held that the suit could not go forward because the Compassionate Use Act does not require an employer to accommodate medical marijuana.

Wild appealed, and the panel of Judges Clarkson Fisher Jr., Richard Hoffman and Karen Suter disagreed. "Because the Compassionate Use Act declared it should not be construed to 'require' an accommodation does not mean such a requirement might be imposed by other legislation," the Appellate Division said when it reversed dismissal of the case.

"It would be ironic indeed if the Compassionate Use Act limited the Law Against Discrimination to permit an employer's termination of a cancer patient's employment by discriminating without compassion," Fisher wrote for the panel.

Courts have generally been unfriendly to the employment rights of medical marijuana users. In once such case, a federal judge in Camden ruled that an employer was not required to accommodate forklift operator Daniel Cotto Jr.'s medical marijuana use by waiving the employee's positive drug test, despite the employee's possession of a doctor's note stating that he could operate machinery while using his prescription.

Jamison Mark of The Mark Law Firm in Basking Ridge, who represents Wild, and Steven Luckner of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart in Morristown, who represents the funeral home, did not respond to requests for comment.