Opinion ID: 1434460
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Other Acts of Discrimination and Retaliation Against Other Employees

Text: Lewis claims the judge wrongfully excluded evidence of other acts of gender discrimination and retaliation by the City. Lewis wanted to show acts taken by other police supervisory personnel  not Williams. In Lewis I, this Court affirmed summary judgment as to Lewis's § 1983 claim against the City, for a lack of evidence demonstrating an express policy of discrimination or a widespread practice of ignoring discrimination complaints. Lewis, 496 F.3d at 656. Thus, the remaining issue at trial was whether there were acts of discrimination or retaliation aimed at Lewis, not anybody else. Accordingly, the judge correctly held that evidence of discrimination and retaliation against other employees would be of limited value. See accord, Grayson v. O'Neil, 308 F.3d 808, 816 (7th Cir.2002) (Evidence of generalized racism directed at others is not relevant unless it has some relationship with the employment decision in question.). The high likelihood of juror confusion and inherent delay that would surely accompany the disputes involved in the introduction of this evidence outweighed what little value could be gleaned from it.