United States Third Circuit

Where employer told plaintiff during the interview that he would be required to pass a drug test as a condition of employment, and the plaintiff said "no problem," then signed a contract acknowledging that his offer of employment was contingent on the test, his consent eliminates a claim of privacy invasion.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/03/2001
• Decided 08/03/2001
• Published 08/03/2001

Judges

• Before:  SCIRICA, ROSENN and GIBSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Randal S. White (Argued), Fox, Rothschild, O'Brien & Frankel, Doylestown, PA, Counsel for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Daniel J. Divis (Argued), Gerolamo, McNulty, Divis & Lewbart, Philadelphia, PA, Counsel for Appellee.