Monthly Law Journal Article: Investigative Detention of Employees Part Two: Non-testimonial Evidence, 2008 (5) AELE Mo. L. J. 201.
     During an investigation of a state employee suspected of taking unauthorized absences from work and falsifying time records, the employer attached a GPS tracking device to his privately owned vehicle. Evidence obtained from monitoring his travels was introduced at his misconduct hearing, which resulted in his termination. An intermediate state appeals court upheld the employer's action and the use of the GPS device to gather evidence of employee misconduct. The use of the device was reasonable when there were reasonable grounds to suspect the employee of misconduct. While the highest court in New York subsequently ruled that the placement of a GPS device on a car in a criminal investigation required a warrant, People v Weaver, #53, 12 N.Y.3d 433, 909 N.E.2d 1195 (2009), that decision was made in 2009, after the events in 2008 involved in the immediate case. Additionally, the case did not involve a criminal investigation, and the investigating agency could not obtain a warrant for its actions. In the Matter of Cunningham v. New York State Dept. of Labor, #512036, 2011 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 8335, 2011 NY Slip Op 8529; 89 A.D.3d 1347;933 N.Y.S.2d 432 (3rd Dept.).
     Arbitrator acquits firefighter of sexual misconduct with a homeowner, who did not testify. The firefighter's denials could not be overcome by the chief's testimony about what the citizen allegedly told him. City of Minneapolis and IAFF L-82, 121 LA (BNA) 77 (Befort, 2005). [2005 FP Sep]
     Federal Administrative Law Judge rejects a lieutenant's claim that he had not been drinking prior to reporting for duty, and that the alcohol test was invalid because he had taken a double dose of NyQuil for a cold. A demotion was sustained, because it was the third time in a few months the officer had reported for duty under the influence of alcohol. Taul v. Dept. of Justice, #CH-0752-04-0507-I-1, 2004 MSPB Lexis 1764 (MSPB 2004).[2005 FP Jan]
     Arbitrator reduces a penalty of an immigration officer from five to one day of suspension, where the Dept. of Homeland Security failed to prove more three of five instances of discourtesy to a citizen. Dept. of Homeland Security and AFGE L-2149, 119 LA (BNA) 783 (Fox, 2003). [2004 FP Jul]
     Arbitrator assesses a 90-day suspension for a public transit employee who dropped his pants and "mooned" a coworker. N.J. Transit and ATU Div. 880, N.J. Mediation #02-0906, 119 LA (BNA) 724 (Gudenberg, 2003). {N/R}
     Appeals court affirms a 20-day suspension, coupled with a one-year probationary period, for a police officer that "solicited, incited and encouraged prisoners to beat another prisoner." Silva v. Kelly, #60569, 238 A.D.2d 245, 656 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 4062 (1997). {N/R}
     Arbitrator upholds termination of an off-duty police officer for DUI. His effectiveness and credibility was "seriously compromised." City of Fairborn, Ohio and L-48 FOP, FMCS Case #03/02469, 119 LA (BNA) 754, (Cohen, 2003). [2004 FP Jul]
     Massachusetts appellate court declines to overturn an arbitration award that reinstated a police officer that filed a false incident report and brought false criminal charges against two people that he had arrested. City of Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen's Assn., #03-P-164, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 920, 805 N.E.2d 527, 2004 Mass. App. Lexis 336 (2004). [2004 FP Jul]
     The fact that the plaintiff's supervisor was under pressure to "get rid" of him was insufficient to prove his claim that he was terminated in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights. Vukadinovich v. Bd. Trustees, #01-1625, 278 F.3d 693, 18 IER Cases (BNA) 385, 2002 U.S. App. Lexis 849 (7th Cir. 2002). [N/R]
      Iowa Supreme Court upholds an order for a security chief to submit to a voiceprint to confirm that he made an obscene phone call. A state law prohibiting the use of polygraph examinations did not apply. Theisen v. Covenant Medical Center, #105/99-0533, 636 N.W.2d 74, 2001 Iowa Sup. Lexis 205, 18 IER Cases (BNA) 114, 39 (1940) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 1346 (Iowa, 2001). [2002 FP Mar]
     Arbitrator was not bound by the technical rules of evidence and a court will not set aside an award because inmates were allowed to testify the accused corrections officer had engaged in similar conduct dating earlier than the 12-month period of limitations for charging employee misconduct, even though such testimony would be inadmissible in court. St. Lawrence Co. Dep. Sheriffs L-2390 and Co. of St. Lawrence, 213 A.D.2d 875; 623 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1995 N.Y.App.Div. Lexis 2837 {N/R}
     Federal appeals court holds that employees are entitled to an evidentiary presumption in EEO cases: any personnel records that have been destroyed prematurely by the employer will be deemed to favor the employee's claim or defense. Favors v. Fisher, 13 F.3d 1235 (8th Cir. 1994). [1995 FP 164]
     Illinois rules that a hearing board cannot exclusively rely on the transcript from a lawsuit. Van Milligan v. Bd. of Fire & Police Cmsnrs., 158 Ill.2d 84, 630 N.E.2d 830 (1994). [1994 FP 100]
     Appellate court refuses to overturn a finding that an officer struck the complainant; officer claimed the citizen was injured when the police car abruptly stopped. LaFemina v. Brown, 598 N.Y.S.2d 784 (A.D. 1993). [1994 FP 100]
     Corrections officer fails to prove he inadvertently ingested cocaine; termination upheld. Green v. Sielaff, 603 N.Y.S.2d 156 (A.D. 1993). [1994 FP 52]
     The credibility of witnesses and the weight given their testimony are findings that will not be disturbed unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence. Merrifield v. Ill. St. Police Merit Bd., 294 Ill.App.3d 520 (1997) citing Launius v. Bd. of Fire & Police Cmsnrs., 151 Ill.2d 419 (1992). {N/R}
     IL appellate court affirms ruling of a disciplinary board that refused to admit into evidence, a petition, signed by many community residents, asking that an accused police officer be retained on the force. The appellate panel concluded that the Board properly refused to consider anything other than evidence of misconduct. Klein v. Board of Fire & Police Cmsnrs. of Pana, 23 Ill.App.3d 201, 318 N.E.2d 726, 1974 Ill.App. Lexis 1812 (1974). {N/R}