Baughman v. Wal-Mart Stores
West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals
215 W. Va. 45, 592 S.E.2d 824 (2003)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
As a condition of employment, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Wal-Mart) (defendant) required prospective employees, including Stephanie Baughman (plaintiff), to submit to drug screening. Specifically, Baughman was required to provide a urine sample for testing after having received a job offer but before commencing her employment with Wal-Mart. Baughman provided the sample and began working at Wal-Mart but later filed a lawsuit in which she alleged that the pre-employment drug screen was per se an actionable invasion of privacy. The trial court entered summary judgment for Wal-Mart, and Baughman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 964,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,006 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.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,006 law school casebooks.


