SCOTUS issues evidence ruling in age discrimination suit.

The U. S. Supreme Court, in Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, 06-1221, (2008), ruled that testimony from workers who suffered job bias but were not parties to the subject federal age discrimination case "is neither per se admissible nor per se inadmissible" under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

The Court made the ruling while reversing a lower court that found the Plaintiff was deprived of a full opportunity to present her Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) case.

Pertinently, the court found that "The question whether evidence of discrimination by other supervisors is relevant in an individual ADEA 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. Applying Rule 403 to determine if evidence is prejudicial also requires a fact intensive, context-specific inquiry. Because Rules 401 and 403 do not make such evidence per se admissible or per se inadmissible, and because the inquiry required by those Rules is within the province of the District Court in the first instance, we vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case with instructions to have the District Court clarify the basis for its evidentiary ruling under the applicable Rules."