United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
621 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2010), 621 F.3d 1162 (2010)
- Written by Shelby Crawford, JD
Facts
The Major League Baseball Players Association (the players) entered an agreement with Major League Baseball whereby the players would be drug tested and the results would be kept confidential. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc. (CDT) (defendant) collected the samples from the players and kept a list of players and their drug test results. The federal government was investigating a company suspected of giving professional baseball players steroids. The government found out that ten players had tested positive in the CDT program and got a subpoena for all records and specimens CDT had from the players. CDT moved to quash the subpoena. Before a ruling on the motion to quash, the government got a warrant to search the records of the ten players suspected of testing positive for drugs. In its affidavit for the search warrant, the government detailed the difficulties of collecting electronically stored data. The judge issuing the warrant gave the government power to search subject to conditions that required the government to first determine if the records of the ten players could reasonably be searched on-site, that agents trained in searching electronic data (computer personnel) who were not involved in the investigation conduct the initial review of the data, and that data determined to fall outside the terms of the search warrant be returned in a reasonable amount of time. However, the government seized hundreds of records when it executed the warrant.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kozinski, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.