From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Baughman v. Wal-Mart Stores
West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals
215 W. Va. 45, 592 S.E.2d 824 (2003)
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
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
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 605,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 605,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 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.