urine test in Louisiana

1999In Swanson v. Augusta's Estate, 403 So.2d 118 (La.App. 4 Cir.1981), writ denied, Swanson v. Estate of Augusta, 407 So.2d 732 (La.1981), this court affirmed a decision of the trial court refusing to allow a urine test offered to show alcoholic content, because no witnesses had been called to testify that the receptacles in which urine specimens had been placed had not been washed with ethyl alcohol.

1983In Swanson v. Estate of Augusta, 403 So.2d 118 (La.App. 4th Cir.1981), the trial court refused to admit a urine test which was offered to determine alcoholic content.

2012Although Trooper Price informed Mr. Schexnaydre that taking the test “was up to him,” Trooper Price did not advise Mr. Schex-naydre that his license would be revoked for failure to submit to the urine test or who would bear the cost of the additional test. 3 In Swan v. Department of Public Safety, 311 So.2d 498 (La.App. 4 Cir.1975), officers instructed the offending driver of his right to counsel pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, but did not make it clear that the right to counsel had no application under the implied consent statute.

2012Although Trooper Price informed Mr. Schexnaydre that taking the test “was up to him,” Trooper Price did not advise Mr. Schex-naydre that his license would be revoked for failure to submit to the urine test or who would bear the cost of the additional test. 3 In Swan v. Department of Public Safety, 311 So.2d 498 (La.App. 4 Cir.1975), officers instructed the offending driver of his right to counsel pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, but did not make it clear that the right to counsel had no application under the implied consent statute.

1999Id. at 124 In Lawless v. New Orleans Police Dept., 550 So.2d 252, 254 (La.App. 4 Cir.1989), writ denied, 551 So.2d 1344 (La.1989), this court held: [B]efore test results, including blood alcohol test results, can be admitted in a civil or a criminal proceeding, the party seeking to introduce the results must lay a proper foundation by "connecting the specimen with its source, showing that it was properly labeled and preserved, properly transported for analysis, and properly taken by an authorized person, properly tested." In Lawless , a pathologist testified that he drew blood from the deceden

1999In Swanson v. Augusta's Estate, 403 So.2d 118 (La.App. 4 Cir.1981), writ denied, Swanson v. Estate of Augusta, 407 So.2d 732 (La.1981), this court affirmed a decision of the trial court refusing to allow a urine test offered to show alcoholic content, because no witnesses had been called to testify that the receptacles in which urine specimens had been placed had not been washed with ethyl alcohol.

1999Id. at 124 In Lawless v. New Orleans Police Dept., 550 So.2d 252, 254 (La.App. 4 Cir.1989), writ denied, 551 So.2d 1344 (La.1989), this court held: [B]efore test results, including blood alcohol test results, can be admitted in a civil or a criminal proceeding, the party seeking to introduce the results must lay a proper foundation by "connecting the specimen with its source, showing that it was properly labeled and preserved, properly transported for analysis, and properly taken by an authorized person, properly tested." In Lawless , a pathologist testified that he drew blood from the deceden

1994In Lewis v. Aluminum Company of America, supra , this Court recognized that, where the petition stated a cause of action in negligence against a third party drug testing company for performing a urine test which resulted in termination of plaintiff's employment, plaintiff stated a cause of action regardless of his status as an at-will employee.

1983However, when the urine test slide was actually offered in evidence, defense counsel said "Your Honor, we have no objection to the introduction of the offering into evidence...." In Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 , 86 S.Ct. 1826 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966), the issue was a blood sample drawn from defendant over defendant's objection.

1983However, when the urine test slide was actually offered in evidence, defense counsel said "Your Honor, we have no objection to the introduction of the offering into evidence...." In Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 , 86 S.Ct. 1826 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966), the issue was a blood sample drawn from defendant over defendant's objection.