Supreme Court Finds No Per Se Rule Against 'Me, Too' Evidence
Updated: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that courts need to make case-by-case determinations when deciding whether to admit “me too” evidence of age discrimination.
The opinion issued today said a federal appeals court should have asked the trial court to clarify why it barred an employee suing for job bias from introducing evidence of discrimination by other supervisors—“me, too” evidence, SCOTUSblog reports.
The federal rules do not make such evidence per se admissible or per se inadmissible, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a unanimous opinion (PDF posted by SCOTUSblog) for the court. Whether the evidence may be introduced in an age discrimination case “is fact-based and depends on many factors, including how closely related the evidence is to the plaintiff’s circumstances and theory of the case,” wrote Thomas, who formerly was chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The plaintiff, Ellen Mendelsohn, was fired in 2002 from Sprint/United Management in company-wide job cuts. She claimed age bias and sought to introduce testimony by three witnesses who heard supervisors make remarks denigrating older workers. Mendelsohn did not work for any of the supervisors, and they played no role in the decision to cut her.
The Associated Press story on the ruling says it leaves the door open for age discrimination plaintiffs to present such evidence.
The case is Sprint/United Management Company v. Mendelsohn. Earlier reports on oral arguments in the case had said several justices appeared to favor exclusion of such evidence or a strong presumption against its admission.
Updated at 9:44 a.m. to include a link to a prior report on oral arguments in the case and the story by Associated Press.
