Legal Opinion
Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 26, 2008No. 06-1221PublishedCited by 535 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas
In this age discrimination case, the District Court excluded testimony by nonparties alleging discrimination at the hands of supervisors of the defendant company who played no role in the adverse employment decision challenged by the plaintiff. The Court of Appeals, having concluded that the District Court improperly applied a per se rule excluding the evidence, engaged in its own analysis of the relevant factors under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403, and remanded with instructions to admit the challenged testimony. We granted certiorari on the question whether the Federal Rules of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Old Chief v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Pullman-Standard v. SwintSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. AbelSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Aramburu v. The Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by535 opinions
- Harper v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Jacqueline Lewis v. City of Union City, GeorgiaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2019
- Mandel v. M & Q Packaging Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. OwensSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- United States v. NacchioCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
530 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.