Legal Opinion

Warren H. Rushton and David L. Lostroh v. Nebraska Public Power District, Don E. Schaufelberger, and Lawrence G. Kuncl

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided June 14, 1988No. 87-1441PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.

Appellants Rushton and Lostroh brought this § 1983 action when they lost their jobs with the Nebraska Public Power District for refusing to undergo urinalysis. After a seven-day trial, the District Court held against them. Rushton v. Nebraska Public Power Dist., 653 F.Supp. 1510 (D.Neb.1987). Now Rushton and Lostroh appeal, arguing that their First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the Nebraska Public Power District’s drug-testing policy. We affirm the judgment of the District Court. 1

I

The Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) is a…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Wisconsin v. YoderSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. New Jersey v. T. L. O.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. United States v. Martinez-FuerteSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security DivisionSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Colorado v. BertineSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Alverado v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Hennessey v. Coastal Eagle Point Oil Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
  4. Knox County Education Association v. Knox County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  5. George Jackson v. Liquid Carbonic CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988

56 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