State v. Rhynes

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that employment agency determinations “vary greatly in quality and factual detail,” and permiting defendants to “expose [any] weaknesses of the report[s].”
• noting that the defendant “had a full opportunity to present to the jury all the evidence it had submitted to the CHRO”
• finding that whether to exclude a Human Rights determination at trial was within the discretion of the district court
• reasoning that when an opposing party’s evidence results in a “false impression,” the opposing party “open[s] the door” to evidence “otherwise inadmissible” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• leaving the admissibility of administrative conclusions under FRE 403 to the discretion of the trial court
• “[T]he fact that evidence is within an exception to the hearsay rule does not by itself make it admissible per se.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).