Anderson v. City of Taylor

2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44706, 2005 WL 1984438 (2005)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Anderson v. City of Taylor

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44706, 2005 WL 1984438 (2005)

Facts

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had a grant program that allowed FEMA to provide grants to fire departments to, among other things, establish wellness programs for firefighters. Programs with mandatory participation received priority. The fire department for the city of Taylor, Michigan (city) (defendant) applied for a FEMA grant to establish a firefighter-wellness program. The department’s proposed program was to be mandatory while also offering the firefighters participation incentives like access to city fitness facilities. FEMA approved the grant application, and the department instituted its wellness program. The program required each firefighter to participate in a health appraisal that involved a mandatory blood draw to test cholesterol levels. Several individual firefighters (plaintiffs) sued the city, alleging that the mandatory blood draws violated their constitutional rights. The city moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was no constitutional violation because the blood draws were purely for health-screening purposes and had no punitive consequences. The district court considered the motion.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Borman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 906,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 906,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 996 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 906,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 996 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership