Legal Opinion

Pantoja v. Anton

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 9, 2011No. F058414PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WISEMAN, Acting P. J.

In this employment discrimination case, we are asked to decide whether the court erred in not allowing the jury to hear “me too” evidence, that is, evidence of the employer’s alleged gender bias in the form of harassing activity against women employees other than the plaintiff. Here, the me-too evidence related to harassing activity that occurred outside plaintiff’s presence and at times other than when plaintiff was employed. At issue is whether the court properly excluded this evidence as propensity or character evidence under Evidence Code section 1101,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Mary J. Riordan v. William L. Kempiners and Shirley RandolphCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
  4. Ginns v. SavageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Miller v. Department of CorrectionsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Nabors Drilling USA, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. McCoy v. Pacific Maritime Asso.California Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. Meeks v. AutoZone, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  4. Hatai v. Peo. of the State of Cal. CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2013
  5. Alvarez v. W & L Harris Ranches CA3California Court of Appeal · 2015

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API