X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
In a case of first impression, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the introduction of testimony by four lay witnesses, which stated that plaintiff’s mistreatment by her supervisor was racially motivated, violated Rule 701(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, in a case brought under Title VII and � 1981. Hester v. BIC Corp., 2000 WL 1299592 (2d Cir. 9/14/00) (Newman, Jacobs and Cardamone, Cir. Judges). The court concluded that by admitting the testimony, the district court had committed a reversible error and, on this basis, overturned the jury verdict in plaintiff’s favor. Plaintiff Annie Hester, an African-American, alleged that her involuntary transfer was the result of “sabotage” by her supervisor, who had failed to train her or to provide her with performance feedback. Ms. Hester alleged that her supervisor’s actions were racially motivated, and she offered the testimony of four co-workers who confirmed that she was “neglected” by her supervisor. Further, three co-workers offered their opinions to the jury that the neglect “must have been” on account of her race. The jury returned a verdict in Ms. Hester’s favor for $10,000 in compensatory damages. The 2nd Circuit began its analysis by noting that a lay witness may offer opinion testimony under Rule 701(a) if, as here, it is based on the witness’ own observations. The issue for the court was the applicability of Rule 701(b), which prohibits the “admission of opinions which would merely tell the jury what result to reach.” The court reasoned that in assessing the admissibility of the testimony, the trial court must be aware that the costs of the lay opinion increases and the benefits decrease when the opinion reaches the ultimate issues in the case. The court acknowledged that it had not yet ruled on the question of whether “a lay witness can opine about the employer’s discriminatory motivation without personal knowledge of facts that formed the basis of the employer’s adverse action.” The court emphasized that none of Ms. Hester’s witnesses were decision-makers, nor had they personal knowledge of the relevant decision-making process. The court further reasoned that there was no “automatic jump” from being a harsh manager to being a racist. “One purpose of Rule 701(b) is to prevent lay witnesses from suggesting that the jury take such a jump.” The court concluded that the lay opinion testimony here violated Rule 701(b), as all four witnesses were allowed to improperly draw an inference of discrimination for the jury. And further, since the prejudice to the employer was significant, the court ruled that a new trial was warranted. For defendant/appellants, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP, by Michael Delikat, New York; for plaintiff/appellees, Leavy Rosenberg & Hyman, by Stephan J. Hyman, New York.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.