Evidence — relevance

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Evidence — relevance

Where a plaintiff was claiming emotion distress, the district court properly allowed the defendant to question him about the effect of his divorce.

“Plyler challenges the district court’s decision to allow Whirlpool to cross-examine him about his divorce. He argues that his divorce did not contribute to the emotional distress that followed the fire, so he contends that questions about his divorce were irrelevant. Evidence is relevant if it has ‘any tendency to make a fact more or less probable,’ see FED. R. EVID. 401, and we give significant deference to a district court’s decision weighing the probative value against prejudice, see Whitehead, 680 F.3d at 930; Cerabio LLC v. Wright Med. Tech., Inc., 410 F.3d 981, 994 (7th Cir. 2005). The inquiry into the emotional impact of Plyler’s divorce was relevant to damages because, after Plyler testified that the fire caused him emotional distress, Whirlpool was entitled to explore whether—despite his denial—other sources, including his divorce, contributed to his emotional distress. See FED. R. EVID. 401. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing questions about the emotional impact of his divorce.”

Affirmed.

12-2798 Plyler v. Whirlpool Corp.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Brown, Mag. J., Rovner, J.