Supreme Court to consider important case on "me too" evidence.

In Sprint v. Mendelsohn, 466 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2006),  the Tenth Circuit held that it was error for the trial court to exclude “me too” testimony from five nonparty witnesses who claimed that they had suffered age discrimination at about the same time as the plaintiff, despite the fact that none of the five worked for the same manager or in the same department as the plaintiff.  The Supreme Court granted certiorari, and will hear oral arguments on December 3, 2007.

The Tenth Circuit’s holding conflicts with rulings from several other circuits including the Sixth.  In Schrand v. Pacific Electric Co., 851 F.2d 152 (6th Cir. 1988), the Sixth Circuit held that similar “me too” testimony from former employees who worked in different offices and under different supervisors was irrelevant to the plaintiff's claim for age discrimination.  Because there was no reasonable or logical way to connect the plaintiff’s discrimination claim with these other allegations, the court concluded that the evidence was inadmissible.  See alsoWyvill v. United Companies Life Insurance Co., 212 F.3d 296 (5th Cir. 2000).  The Supreme Court's review of this case should resolve the conflict between the circuits.

Posted by: George E. Yund