Legal Opinion
Timm v. Reitz
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided December 6, 2001No. 00CA1698PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge CASEBOLT.
In this action challenging the constitution ality of a state regulation mandating random, suspicionless drug testing of licensed dog trainers in the greyhound racing industry, plaintiffs, Gary W. Timm and Cynthia J. Timm, appeal the summary judgment in favor of defendants, David Reitz, the Director of the Colorado Department of Revenue Division of Racing Events (division), and Irving S. Hook, W. Gale Davey, Michael B. Johnson, Gene Naugle, and Arnold L. Mackley, the members of the Colorado Racing Commission. We reverse and remand.
The following facts are undisputed.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- New Jersey v. T. L. O.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Vernonia School District 47J v. ActonSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Von RaabSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- City of Indianapolis v. EdmondSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. ShreckColorado Court of Appeals · 2004
- Allen v. MartinColorado Court of Appeals · 2008
- Curragh Queensland Mining Ltd. v. Dresser Industries, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2002
- Luttgen v. FischerColorado Court of Appeals · 2005
- Eason v. BOARD OF CTY. COM'RS OF BOULDERColorado Court of Appeals · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.