Legal Opinion
Curtis v. State
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided July 17, 2001No. 25319PublishedCited by 91 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TOAL, Chief Justice:
Kenneth E. Curtis (“Curtis”) appeals the trial court’s denial of a temporary injunction concerning the enforcement of S.C.Code Ann. § 16-13-470 (Supp.2000), which prohibits the selling of urine with the intent to defraud a drug screening test. We affirm.
Facts/Procedural History
In 1996, Curtis started an internet business known as Privacy Protection Services. 1 Through this business, Curtis sells his own urine, which is certified as drug and adulterant free, along with a “urine test substitution kit.” Each urine test substitution kit comes with Curtis’ urine, a pouch, a…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Isuani v. Manske-Sheffield Radiology Group, P.A.Texas Supreme Court · 1991
- Joytime Distributors & Amusement Co. v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- In Re the Treatment & Care of LuckabaughSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- Sloan v. Greenville CountyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
- State v. McKnightSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
- Sloan Ex Rel. State v. Friends of the Hunley, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- In Re DNA Ex Post Facto IssuesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.