Debt collectors and district attorneys are teaming up to bully bad-check writers into paying their debt, including a California woman who bounced a $48 check to Walmart and was threatened with jail time.

In a practice that has spread to more than 300 prosecutors' offices, collection companies are sending signed letters on D.A. letterhead that threaten jail time unless the check writers settle up and pay for a "financial accountability" class, reported the New York Times.

Even petty amounts owed can invite harsh treatment. Single mom Angela Yartz told the paper she was unaware that a $47.95 check she had written to Walmart had bounced. She later received a letter signed by the Alameda County (Calif.) district attorney that she better fork over $280.05 or face up to a year behind bars.

Intimidation tactics are nothing new on the bill collection front, of course. Even hospitals are accused of using them. The University of Minnesota Medical Center in Minneapolis is now being probed for allegedly harassing very sick patients into paying up or risk losing medical care.

Debt collection is a $12 billion-a-year business, and 30 million people are now in the cross-hairs of bill collectors, reported the Los Angeles Times. So it should be no surprise that firms are stepping up their strong-arm tactics.

Last year, the Federal Trade Commission received 180,928 complaints about the debt recovery biz, the LAT said.

In the arrangement between debt collectors and district attorneys, the agencies secure their share plus the class fee and the district attorneys get paid by the agencies or receive a share of the money collected, reported the Times.

Above the Law pointed out the potential conundrum of threatening someone with imprisonment on prosecutor letterhead before a lawyer has even considered the case. District attorneys explained to the Times that the letters reduce their caseload, and that only those who ignore merchant warnings are contacted.

Yartz, the Walmart customer, noticed that part of her jacked-up settlement bill from the D.A. included $180 for the budgeting class. The Times said she eventually paid $100.05 to cover the bounced check and penalties, and took her chances with the rest.

A Michigan appeals court ruled this week that a Walmart employee with an inoperable brain tumor and cancer was not wrongfully fired over medical marijuana use.

Upholding a decision by a federal judge in Grand Rapids, Mich., last year, the appeals court said that "Michigan law doesn't stop employers from firing people who use medical marijuana," the Associated Press reports.

Joseph Casias was an inventory-control manager at a Walmart in Battle Creek, Mich., until he was fired after he tested positive for marijuana in 2009.

According to a 2010 report by the Associated Press, Casias uses medical marijuana to treat symptoms of an inoperable brain tumor and cancer. The married father of two has been in remission for several years, but the medical condition causes him pain and interferes with his ability to speak.

His oncologist had prescribed the treatment after Michigan voters approved medical marijuana use in 2008.

"No patient should be forced to choose between adequate pain relief and gainful employment, and no employer should be allowed to intrude upon private medical choices made by employees in consultation with their doctors," said Scott Michelman, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, in 2010. The ACLU and its Michigan branch, along with attorney Daniel W. Grow, represented Casias in the lawsuit against Walmart.

"For some people, working at Walmart is just a job, but for me, it was a way of life," Casias said in a statement released in 2010. "I came to Walmart for a better opportunity for my family, and I worked hard and proved myself. I just want the opportunity to continue my work."

Addressing the case, Walmart said that marijuana use "conflicts with its safety policy in stores."

"The doctor prescribed treatment was not the relevant issue. The issue is about the ability of our associates to do their jobs safely," the company said in 2010.

ACLU insists that Casius complied with "all applicable state laws and never once smoked marijuana at work or came to work under its influence."

Nonetheless, a federal appeals court said Wednesday that the "state medical marijuana law provides some immunity in criminal cases, but it doesn't offer protection to people in the workplace," according to the Associated Press.