From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
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 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
