FRE 403

by

In Swanson v. Dr. Don Chapman, DDS, PLLC, No. CV 24-1622, 2026 WL 318971 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 6, 2026), a sexual harassment case, the court denied defendants’ motion in limine to exclude two instances of alleged sexual misconduct. The court held that the evidence was relevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, and not subject to…

Read More Motions in Limine Denied; Sexual Harassment Evidence Was Relevant and Not Unfairly Prejudicial
Share This:
by

A recent decision, Boyce v. Bruce Weber and Little Bear, Inc., 19-cv-3825, 2021 WL 2821154 (S.D.N.Y. July 7, 2021), is instructive as to how courts resolve evidentiary issues arising in the context of sexual harassment claims. In this case, plaintiff (a fashion model) asserts claims for sexual harassment against defendant Weber (a fashion photographer) under…

Read More Court Rules on “Modus Operandi” Witnesses in Bruce Weber Sexual Harassment Case
Share This:
by

In Doton v. City of Syracuse, 11-CV-620, 2019 WL 6337326 (NDNY Nov. 27, 2019), a gender discrimination case, the court ruled on various motions in limine with respect to evidence the parties seek to introduce at the upcoming trial. Among other issues addressed by the court, defendants sought to preclude Plaintiff from offering “me too” evidence “regarding…

Read More Court Discusses “Me Too” Evidence in Gender Discrimination Case
Share This:
by

In Crawford v. ExlService.com, LLC et al, 16-cv-9137, 2019 WL 6284228 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2019), the court held that the former in-house counsel for defendant “is not categorically precluded from testifying on grounds of attorney-client privilege”, reasoning that “not all conversations between an attorney and a client are privileged.” The court noted that “[a]t trial,…

Read More Former In-House Counsel May Testify in Hostile Work Environment Case
Share This:
by

In Boger v. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation, 17-cv-289, 2019 WL 6038545 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2019) – an age and discrimination case – the court, inter alia, precluded plaintiff from introducing so-called “me too” evidence from plaintiff’s co-workers who were also allegedly discriminated against. The court reasoned: Because Nagle and…

Read More Co-Worker Employment Discrimination Evidence Precluded as Prejudicial
Share This: