Legal Opinion

Smith v. Fresno Irrigation District

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 17, 1999No. F028993PublishedCited by 10 opinions

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

LEVY, J.

Introduction

Defendant Fresno Irrigation District challenges two rulings of the trial court: (1) the determination that plaintiff Ronald Smith was not required to exhaust the district’s internal grievance procedure prior to filing suit for wrongful termination; and (2) the ruling that plaintiff was not in a safety-sensitive position and hence the random drug test which plaintiff was required to take violated his constitutional right to privacy and his right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.

In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we will affirm the trial…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Vernonia School District 47J v. ActonSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. National Treasury Employees Union v. Von RaabSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Chandler v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.California Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. In re Yahoo Mail LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
  2. In Re Aaron CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  3. Anchorage Police Department Employees Ass'n v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Edgerton v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  5. (PC) Allen v. ClendeninDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023

5 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