As used in this Article, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
(1) "Approved laboratory" means a clinical chemistry laboratory which performs controlled substances testing and which has demonstrated satisfactory performance in the forensic urine drug testing programs of the United States Department of Health and Human Services or the College of American Pathologists for the type of tests and controlled substances being evaluated.
(1a) "Controlled substance" is as defined in G.S. 90-87(5) or a metabolite thereof.
(1b) "Controlled substance examination" means all actions related to drug testing for the purpose of determining if an examinee has used controlled substances.
(2) "Examiner" means a person, firm, or corporation, doing business in the State, including State, county, and municipal employers, who is the employer or prospective employer of the examinee and who performs or has performed by an approved laboratory a controlled substance examination.
(3) "Examinee" means an individual who is an employee of the examiner or an applicant for employment with the examiner and who is requested or required by an examiner to submit to a controlled substance examination.
(4) "Screening" means initial controlled substance examination performed for the purpose of determining use of controlled substances by an examinee. (1991, c. 687; 1993, c. 213, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 515 S.E.2d 438 (N.C. 1999).
· cites it 9× “§ 95-232 by failing to have the testing performed by an “approved laboratory,” as defined by N.C.G.S. § 95-231(1). Defendant filed an answer denying any wrongdoing and asserting a third-party complaint against Allied.”
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 501 S.E.2d 83 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 11× “Commission hearing, Wayne Amman (Amman), the Assistant Safety Director for the defendant who was responsible for implementing the drug screening program, testified that an ACL representative had specifically informed him that ACL was “certified,” however, Amman did not question…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-231(1) — 2 cases
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 515 S.E.2d 438 (N.C. 1999).
“§ 95-232 by failing to have the testing performed by an “approved laboratory,” as defined by N.C.G.S. § 95-231(1). Defendant filed an answer denying any wrongdoing and asserting a third-party complaint against Allied.”
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 501 S.E.2d 83 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998).
“Commission hearing, Wayne Amman (Amman), the Assistant Safety Director for the defendant who was responsible for implementing the drug screening program, testified that an ACL representative had specifically informed him that ACL was “certified,” however, Amman did not question…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-231(2) — 1 case
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 501 S.E.2d 83 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998).
“Commission hearing, Wayne Amman (Amman), the Assistant Safety Director for the defendant who was responsible for implementing the drug screening program, testified that an ACL representative had specifically informed him that ACL was “certified,” however, Amman did not question…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-231(3) — 1 case
Garner v. Rentenbach Constructors Inc., 501 S.E.2d 83 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998).
“Commission hearing, Wayne Amman (Amman), the Assistant Safety Director for the defendant who was responsible for implementing the drug screening program, testified that an ACL representative had specifically informed him that ACL was “certified,” however, Amman did not question…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.