Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The plaintiff, a recently accepted firefighter trainee applicant with the Oklahoma City Fire Department (Department), was fired from his position after the Department discovered that he had taken roughly three puffs of a cigarette during his lunch break, despite signing a pre-employment agreement that he would not smoke a cigarette on or off duty for a period of one year. The plaintiff challenged his dismissal, claiming that it had violated his rights of liberty, privacy, property and due process protected under the Constitution. The district court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed the case. On appeal, the plaintiff maintained that his liberty and privacy rights included the right to smoke. The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that the rule did concern a fundamental liberty interest but that Oklahoma City had an interest in regulating the behavior of their employees and that the interest was strong enough to justify rational restrictions on the firefighter trainee's rights.