American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1616 v. Thornburgh
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
INGRAM, District Judge.
The parties’ cross-motions for summary-judgment were submitted on July 29, 1991 for decision without oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 220-1. Having considered the moving papers submitted by the parties and the arguments contained therein, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT EACH OF THE PARTIES’ MOTIONS IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
Plaintiffs challenge three types of drug testing which the INS desires to conduct pursuant to its Drug Free Workplace-Applicant and Employee Drug Testing Program. Specifically, plaintiffs challenge random,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mark B. Harmon v. Richard L. Thornburgh, Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Clayton Yeutter, Secretary, United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
- American Federation of Government Employees, Afl-Cio v. Samuel K. Skinner, Secretary Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Western Conference of Teamsters v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1533 v. CheneyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1990
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Plane v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1992
- Jaramillo v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998