Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 5 v. Tucker

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 17, 1989No. 88-1467Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCowen, Circuit Judge

I

I agree with the majority that the defendants had evidence sufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion that the plaintiff officers were using drugs, and that the defendants therefore did not violate the plaintiffs’ rights under the fourth amendment when they ordered the plaintiffs to submit to urinalysis. I also agree with the majority’s conclusion that the defendants violated the plaintiffs’ right to procedural due process when they did not inform the plaintiffs of the evidence giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the officers had used drugs before they were discharged. I thus…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Codd v. VelgerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Gniotek v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
  5. Perri v. AytchCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API