Legal Opinion
Penny v. Kennedy
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided October 4, 1990No. Nos. 86-6280, 86-6281PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ENGEL, Senior Circuit Judge.
These consolidated en banc appeals resulted from separate actions challenging the constitutionality of proposed mandatory urinalysis of the City of Chattanooga’s fire fighters and police officers without reasonable cause or suspicion to believe that the employees so tested were using controlled substances. See Lovvorn v. City of Chattanooga, Tenn., 647 F.Supp. 875 (E.D.Tenn.1986), as to the fire fighters, and Penny v. Kennedy, 648 F.Supp. 815 (E.D.Tenn.1986), concerning Chattanooga’s police officers. The particularized facts in each of these appeals have been…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Von RaabSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Lovvorn v. City of Chattanooga, Tenn.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1986
- Penny v. KennedyDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Rosemary Feliciano v. State of Rhode IslandCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Alexander GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Baggs v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
- Holliday v. City of ModestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Marchwinski v. HowardCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.