Sign In Sign Up Contact

Search

BROWSE SEARCH SPINDOC HELP

Browse from Does the relevance requirement apply to non-circumstantial evidence?

view tree to see hierarchy and quickly navigate

view icon key

Law »

Courts »

Evidence »

Admissibility of evidence »

Relevance rules »

Relevance and prejudice »

Relevance »

Circumstantial evidence »

Whether evidence of improper motive in employment discrimination litigation must be "direct": Whether direct evidence...

1658:false:false:false:false:false:false:true:false:false:!:false:-1:-1

Split: a topic about which there is a dispute

Whether direct evidence is required in employment discrimination litigation to show discriminatory motive or whether circumstantial evidence may suffice to show improper motive

Contributed in 2008 & last edited in 2010 by Peter Tillers

You've come to a split

, which means there's some disagreement about this topic. See the options in the menu box on the right.

Please sign in or sign up to see the authorities.

Contribution Suggestions

complete authority for rule...

General Rule: a rule with an exception(s)

The therapist-patient or psychotherapist-patient privilege is applicable in civil actions.

vouch for authority for rule...

Rule: a rule of law

If a defamatory statement impugns a person's character and if truth is a defense, character may be admissible to show that the otherwise defamatory...

vouch for authority for rule...

Rule: a rule of law

To fall within the hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(3) or a comparable State rule for person's present internal states, a...

view more suggestions