Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Sprint/United Management Company v. Mendelsohn

Docket No.: 06-1221
Certiorari Granted: Jun 11 2007
Argued: December 3, 2007
Decided: February 26, 2008

PartyNames: SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT CO. v. MENDELSOHN
Petitioner: Sprint/United Management Company
Respondent: Ellen Mendelsohn

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Sprint/United Management Company
v.
Ellen Mendelsohn
552 U.S. 379 (2008)
Question Presented:

This case presents a recurring question of proof in employment discrimination cases: whether a district court must admit "me, too" evidence - testimony, by nonparties, alleging discrimination at the hands of persons who played no role in the adverse employment decision challenged by the plaintiff. The Tenth Circuit panel majority held that a court commits reversible error by excluding "me, too" evidence. This decision conflicts with those of other circuits. Specifically, four circuits have held "me, too" evidence wholly irrelevant. Five circuits have held that "me, too" evidence may be excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Granting certiorari will resolve the conflict between the circuit courts of appeals on this important question of law.

Question:

In employment discrimination cases, must a court admit "me, too" evidence - testimony by other employees who are not parties to the case and who were allegedly discriminated against by persons who had no role in the employment decision being challenged by the plaintiff?

Holding: judgment vacated and remanded
Vote: 9-0
Opinion By:
Read SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT COMPANY V. MENDELSOHN opinion (PDF)

Other Resources for Sprint/United Management Company v. Mendelsohn:
resource.org
justia.com
wikipedia.org