Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709)overrides a person's expectation of privacy.
As evidence, the Court pointed to the fact that Dr. Ortega did not share his office with any other employees and because there was no evidence the hospital had any policy discouraging employees from keeping personal items in their offices.
The majority ruled that getting a warrant to search the office would "...conflict with 'the common sense realization that government offices could not function if every employment decision became a constitutional matter.'" Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 143 (1983). (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709)
The majority also determined that using "probable cause" to justify the search would have been an undue burden on public employees, saying that public employers are concerned about the work of the agency and not...
should be judged by the standard of reasonableness under all the circumstances. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709
The Court did not present a specific test to determine when the government's interest in the operation of the workplace outweighs an employee's expectation of privacy. It left it to the lower courts to determine the level of reasonableness and balance on a case-by-case basis. "...it cannot be determined whether the search of the respondent's office, and the seizure of his personal belongings, satisfied the standard of reasonableness. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709
Writing for
In the end, the Court opined that, public employer intrusions on the constitutionally protected privacy interests of government employees for noninvestigatory, work-related purposes... should be judged by the standard of reasonableness under all the circumstances. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709
The Court did not present a specific test to determine when the government's interest in the operation of the workplace outweighs an employee's expectation of privacy. It left it to the lower courts to determine the level of reasonableness and balance on a case-by-case basis. "...it cannot be determined whether the search of the respondent's office, and the seizure of his personal belongings, satisfied the standard of reasonableness. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=480&invol=709
Writing for
Ortega's Fourth Amendment rights would be implicated only if the conduct of the Hospital officials infringed an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable. The court stated that "Because the reasonableness of an expectation of privacy, as well as the appropriate standard for a search, is understood to differ according to context, it is essential first to delineate the boundaries of the workplace context. The workplace includes those areas and items that are
Employee Privacy Torts Issues relating to employee privacy have been at the forefront of businesses for many years. This has been fuelled by the dynamic workplace which changes constantly and also by employees and employers being more litigation-conscious. Technology has also spurred on employee privacy issues with e-mail and the internet being related to heightened concerns about vulnerability of employers to litigation. Many employers have thus exacerbated their concerns relating to