Opinion ID: 167809
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Legal M emoranda

Text: M s. Saurini argues that she should have been allowed to introduce copies of legal memoranda and newsletters prepared by the School District relating to a school counselor’s duty to report child abuse. The documents, she says, were relevant “to show the basis for her reasonable suspicion and decision to report child abuse.” Aplt. Br. at 60. Her theory is that the documents are relevant because her fellow counselors relied on them when they advised her to report suspected abuse. -19- The defendants objected to their admission at trial, arguing that the documents were irrelevant because (1) they were “just a collection of various documents that have been distributed by the school district over the course of many years,” Aplt. App. at 1076, (2) they predated M s. Saurini’s employment and there was no showing that she had ever seen them, and (3) there was “no fact at issue in the case regarding what [a fellow counselor] knew or where he got the information from. This doesn’t tend to show one w ay or the other w hether Laura Saurini was retaliated against for reporting child abuse,” id. at 1081. The district court excluded the evidence. W e see no error in this ruling. Any relevance was minimal.