In a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court settled a split within the circuit courts as to the proper admissibility of ?me too? evidence in ?pattern and practice? discrimination cases. In such cases, the plaintiff claims the employer has generally discriminated against employees within the plaintiff?s protected classification, and offers to provide evidence or testimony by people in the same company and class as the plaintiff who claims similar discrimination, though it may have been from a different supervisor.
In Sprint/United Mgmt. Co. v. Mendelsohn, 128 S. Ct. 1140 (U.S. 2008), the United States Supreme Court expressly declined to adopt a per se rule of admissibility or exclusion, instead holding that such evidence should be assessed on a case-by-case basis by trial courts. The trial court must conduct a fact-intensive, context-specific inquiry, and can permit such ?me too? evidence only if it is relevant to the case and its probative value is not substantially outweighed by the danger of its prejudicial effect before the jury.

Back to main