Legal Opinion
Don Serpas, Raymond Johnson and Carl Waters, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Charles E. Schmidt
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided December 19, 1986No. 85-2393PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CUDAHY, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs brought this suit, individually and on behalf of all exercise persons, grooms and hot walkers (collectively, “backstretchers”) at Illinois race tracks, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from certain investigative practices authorized by the Illinois Racing Board (the “Board”) and carried out by the Illinois Department of Law Enforcement (“IDLE”) on the ground that these practices violated the Fourth Amendment, as applied to the State of Illinois through the Fourteenth Amendment. The challenged practices included warrantless searches of the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- New York v. BeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- National Treasury Employees Union v. RaabCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
- People v. KruegerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1991
- Andree v. Ashland CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Steven Leroy v. Illinois Racing BoardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Andree v. Ashland CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.