DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.

133264P.pdf   12/22/2016  Branden Kittle-Aikeley  v.  Donald Claycomb
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-3264
                          and No:  14-1145
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City   
[PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, on behalf of the Court En Banc] Civil case - Student Drug Testing. In this case, the district court granted the students of Linn State Technical College a permanent injunction prohibiting the school from fully implementing a new drug-testing policy which required students to submit to urinalysis; a divided panel of this court reversed the permanent injunction and the attorneys' fees award to plaintiff students - see Kittle-Aikeley v. Claycomb, 807 F.3d 913 (8th Cir. 2015). The court en banc granted the students' petition for rehearing en banc and the district court's order permanently enjoining the school from drug testing students "who were not, are not and will not be enrolled" in safety-sensitive programs is affirmed;however that portion of the district court's order directing the defendants to refund any fees that the school had charged for unconstitutional testing is reversed as such a claim is barred by the Eleventh Amendment; the court dismisses for lack of jurisdiction the school's appeal from the district court's tentative grant of attorneys' fees and costs as the amounts had not been quantified. Judge Beam, with whom Judge Loken joins, concurring and dissenting. 133264P.pdf 12/07/2015 Brandon Kittle-Aikeley v. Donald Claycomb U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-3264 and No: 14-1145 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
[PUBLISHED] [Beam, Author, with Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Drug Testing. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, see Barrett v. Claycomb, 705 F.3d 315 (8th Cir. 2013)where the court reversed the grant of a preliminary injunction in favor of plaintiffs on their facial challenge to Linn State Technical College's drug-testing policy. On remand, plaintiffs clarified their claims to assert an "as-applied" challenge to the same policy, and the district court enjoined the policy in part and prohibited the testing of students who were not enrolled in five enumerated programs. The district court erred in enjoining the policy as to the students not enrolled in the five enumerated programs as, on balance, testing the entire student population entering the college is reasonable and hence a constitutional and effective means of addressing the college's interest in providing a safe, healthy workplace given the fact that the students at this particular technical college are engaged in safety-sensitive and potentially dangerous activities. Judge Bye, dissenting.