Legal Opinion

Doe v. City and County of Honolulu

Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals

Decided August 12, 1991No. 14568; CIV. NO. 89-2826PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

In McCloskey v. Honolulu Police Department, 71 Haw. 568, 799 P.2d 953 (1990), the supreme court determined that the Honolulu Police Department’s (HPD) urinalysis drug testing program did not violate the right to privacy and unreasonable search provisions of the Hawaii Constitution. This case requires this court to decide whether the Honolulu Fire Department’s (HFD) drug screening program by urine testing violates the right to be free from unreasonable searches and the right to privacy under both the United States and Hawaii Constitutions. We conclude that it does not, and affirm the circuit…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Whalen v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Anchorage Police Department Employees Ass'n v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Harris v. DeSotoHawaii Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Petersen v. City of MesaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  4. Anchorage Police Department Employees Ass'n v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Anchorage Police Department Employees Ass'n v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001

1 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