Altobello v. Borden Confectionary Products, Inc.

872 F.2d 215 (7th Cir. 1989)

Facts

Altobello (P) sued D for age discrimination. During the trial, there was merely a back and forth exchange based D claiming that P was a malingerer and P claiming that that characterization was merely a pretext of getting rid of him because of his age. During the trial, D offered evidence of P's prior conviction of tampering with electric meters of Commonwealth Edison (ten years before the trial). This was a misdemeanor conviction and was admissible under Rule 609(a)(2). P argued for exclusion because the prejudicial effect substantially outweighed its probative value (but Rule 403 was subsequently determined not to apply to Rule 609(a)(2). P lost the verdict and appealed.