From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackman v. Weil, Gotshal Manges, LLP

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Aug 3, 2007
CV-06-895 (BMC) (VVP) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2007)

Opinion

CV-06-895 (BMC) (VVP).

August 3, 2007


ORDER


At the final pretrial conference on July 9, 2007, I reserved decision on the admissibility of defendant's proposed Exhibit D (a November 29, 2005 letter to plaintiff from an EEOC investigator enclosing a right to sue notice), and ordered the parties to file letters addressing the issue. After considering the submissions [64, 65], I find that the document is inadmissible at trial.

Plaintiff's argument that the document lacks trustworthiness and therefore falls outside the public records exception to the hearsay rule is without merit. However, the document's probative value is outweighed by the danger of undue prejudice and the likelihood that plaintiff's effort to demonstrate its unreliability will confuse the jury and result in an undue waste of time. See Fed.R.Evid. 403; Paolitto v. John Brown E. .C., Inc, 151 F.3d 60, 65 (2d Cir. 1998). Defendant will have a full opportunity to present to the jury all of the evidence it submitted to the EEOC, and the sole purpose of admitting the letter would be to suggest to the jurors that they should reach the same conclusions as the agency. See id. (internal citations and quotations omitted). Therefore, the document is inadmissible at trial.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jackman v. Weil, Gotshal Manges, LLP

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Aug 3, 2007
CV-06-895 (BMC) (VVP) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2007)
Case details for

Jackman v. Weil, Gotshal Manges, LLP

Case Details

Full title:CHERINE JACKMAN, Plaintiff, v. WEIL, GOTSHAL MANGES, LLP, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Aug 3, 2007

Citations

CV-06-895 (BMC) (VVP) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2007)