Legal Opinion

Roe v. Quality Transportation Services

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 20, 1992No. 11617-4-IIIPublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

Jane Roe, 1 a private employee, was terminated from her office position with Brader Hauling Service, Inc., a subsidiary of Quality Transportation Services, for refusing to submit to drug testing pursuant to a company policy. Ms. Roe brought a wrongful discharge action against Brader and Quality (collectively referred to as Quality). The trial court granted Quality's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (CR 12(b)(6)) holding there was no clear mandate of public policy prohibiting a private employer from requiring drug testing of a terminable-at-will…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Thompson v. St. Regis Paper CompanyWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Harless v. First National Bank in FairmontWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. StroudWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Dicomes v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Stein v. Davidson Hotel Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Roberts v. DudleyWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Hart v. Seven Resorts Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
  4. Sedlacek v. HillisWashington Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Lords v. Northern Automotive Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1994

18 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