The Supreme Court yesterday unanimously dodged the question that many thought it would answer — whether a plaintiff alleging employment discrimination may use "me too" evidence from other workers who had "similar" experiences.  The Court instead held that the trial judge may or may not have messed up in disallowing such evidence but that the court of appeals definitely did screw the pooch in concluding that the judge’s ambiguous reasoning showed a mistake.  The Court accordingly remanded the case to give the district court a chance to sort out the evidentiary question and possible retrial.  Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, No. 06-1221 (U.S. Feb. 26, 2008).

Feedicon_2 Judges decide discrete issues discreetly.