When offered in civil actions, other similar events generally do not constitute character, or propensity, and are therefore not barred by the character rule, which prohibits the use of a person's character or propensity to show that person's conduct.

United States v. Swan, 486 F.3d 260, 264-265 (7th Cir. 2007) (upholding trial court's admission of agent's testimony as to attorney's statement as an admission of a party by an agent because "the government....A statement by an agent or an employee can be imputed to the principal or the employer (respectively) and be treated as a vicarious admission (that, like other admissions, is exempt from the prohibition against hearsay) only if the statement was made during the agency or employment relationship.

Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, pin? (2006).texf

United States v. Bear Stops, 997 F.2d 451, 455 (8th Cir. 1993) (reversing conviction for aggravated sexual abuse of a child because, even though the trial court limited the admission of evidence that victim was sexually assaulted by three older boys, the admission of such evidence was constitutionally...The sexual history or predisposition of the alleged victim is admissible if its exclusion would violate a criminal defendant's constitutional rights.