Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 07-18-2022
Case Style:
Markie Lloyd and Natalia Shaw v. Overstock.com, Inc.
Case Number: 2:18-cv-00955
Judge: Daphe A. Oberg
Court: United States District Court for the District of Utah (Salt Lake County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney: P. Corper James, II, William G. Gilchrist and Brooke A. White
Description: Salt Lake City, Utah civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiffs, who sued Defendant on job discrimination theories under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Plaintiffs Markie Lloyd and Natalia Shaw brought this action against their former employer, Overstock.com, Inc. (“Overstock”), alleging disability discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. Plaintiffs claim they were wrongfully terminated because of their disabilities and in retaliation for protected activity under the ADA.
Evidence is relevant if: (a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.” Fed.R.Evid. 401. Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. Fed.R.Evid. 402. Even if relevant, “[t]he court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of . . . unfair prejudice.” Fed.R.Evid. 403. Additionally, “[a] witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 602
Outcome: Defendant's motion granted in part and denied in part.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: