CourtCases2010

footnotes

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: f Pennsauken, 709 F. Supp. 1329 (D.N.J. 1989)(there is a legitimate interest in reducing litigation and lessening liability insurance expenses). Moreover, we note that the Surgeon General's findings that cigarette smoking is hazardous to health is well supported. However, the City's interest in saving money for the taxpayers does not override Kurtz' privacy interest in being free from regulation of her personal life as a condition of government employment, especially when that condition is lawful and unrelated to job functions. Unlike Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners, where the supreme court found that an applicant's psychological history was relevant to determine the applicant's fitness to practice law, here the off-duty use of tobacco has no relevance [**12] to a clerk-typist's ability to perform the duties required by such a job. Although the City may, and indeed perhaps should, provide a smoke-free working environment, n8 we conclude that the City's interests are not sufficient to reach the private lawful conduct of potential employees. In sum, we reverse the summary judgment. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n8 See supra note 1. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Reversed. 63 Case # 9 (two cases) THE CITY OF NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA v. KURTZ THE CITY OF NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. ARLENE KURTZ, Respondent. No. 82,836 SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA 653 So. 2d 1025; 1995 Fla. LEXIS 568; 10 BNA IER CAS 865; 66 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P43,537; 20 Fla. Law W. S 170 April 20, 1995, Decided SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: [**1] Rehearing Denied July 5, 1995. Released for Publication July 5, 1995. PRIOR HISTORY: Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified Great Public Importance. Third District - Case No. 92-2038 (Dade County). COUNSEL: Thomas M. Pflaum, Micanopy, Florida; Pedro P. Echarte, Jr., Miami, Florida; and David M. Wolpin, North Miami, Florida, for Petitioner. Pamela...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online