Legal Opinion
Armington v. School Dist. of Philadelphia
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 22, 1991No. Civ. A. 90-3698PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
LUDWIG, District Judge.
Plaintiff and defendant move for summary judgment. Defendant asserts that this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim is time-barred by a two-year statute of limitations. The underlying constitutional issue is whether defendant as plaintiff’s employer had reasonable suspicion to require plaintiff to submit to a drug test. 1 Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b).
On June 5, 1990 plaintiff Charles Armington filed this action claiming that the School District of Philadelphia had violated his fourth amendment rights on February 5, 1988 when it directed him to undergo a urinalysis. Plaintiff was a…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Alabama v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Liliana Cuesta v. School Board of Miami-DadeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
- Mullins v. Rockwell International Corp.California Supreme Court · 1997
- Jacobson v. Parda Federal Credit UnionMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
- Daryel Garrison v. Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Williams v. Environmental Defense FundNew York Supreme Court · 1996
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.