City of Albany v. Freeney

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, under the open door doctrine, a party can use rebuttal evidence of a prior incident, but the rebuttal evidence cannot seek to elicit \ details \ of the prior incident
• holding that once “the proverbial door was opened to the disputed testimony, it remained for the trial court to balance its probative value against its prejudicial nature”
• holding that, under the open 18 door doctrine, a party can use rebuttal evidence of a prior incident, but the rebuttal evidence cannot seek to elicit “details” of the prior incident
• ‘‘[a] finding of discrimination, or a finding of no discrimination, is a finding of fact’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).