The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

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.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.