After-Acquired Evidence

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses the issue of after-acquired evidence in court cases. The paper presents a focus on this factor in cases that deal with employment discrimination. To illustrate the topic, the paper provides the 1995 case of McKennon versus Nashville Banner, wherein the Supreme Court made its determination about after-acquired evidence. The paper also examines civil rights laws such as Title VII and the ADEA, that are aimed at reducing discrimination in employment practices.

From the Paper:

"For years the circuit courts had been disputing whether or not, 'in an employment discrimination case, evidence of employee wrongdoing that was acquired by an employer after a discriminatory discharge could be used in defeating an employee's claim of employer discrimination" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). The Fourth, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits maintained that after-acquired evidence was admissible. However, the Third and Eleventh Circuits believed that such evidence could not provide an employer with an affirmative defense to an employment discrimination case. The Seventh Circuit went back and forth between admissibility."

More papers on After-Acquired Evidence:

• Essay # 137803 : "Does Inflation Vary with Income? A Look at the Evidence"
• Research Paper # 22225 : "Mckennon V. Nashville Banner Publishing"
• Research Paper # 117053 : "Prevention For Nonsocomial Pneumonia"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: