McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co.
This comment will discuss the issue of after-acquired evidence in employment discrimination cases by looking at the Supreme Court decision in McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co. The first part of the comment will provide a factual introduction to the case and the issues. The second part of the paper will discuss the antecedents to the decision, focusing mainly upon the Circuit Court decisions in this area. The third part of the paper will discuss the analysis in the case itself and the ramifications of the decision.
Christine McKennon worked for the Nashville Banner Publishing Company for thirty years before she was discharged at age 62. The company claimed that Ms. McKennon was discharged as part of a work force reduction plan which was implemented in order to reduce costs. Ms. McKennon, on the other hand, believed that she was discharged because of her age. She filed suit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee; in her complaint, she alleged that the company violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Under this act, it is unlawful for an employer to "discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age." In this suit, Ms. McKennon sought a number of legal and equitable remedies, including back pay.
The company responded by alleging that the case was not so simple as the plaintiff made it out to be. During her deposition, Ms. McKennon testified that she had copied several confidential company documents concerning the company's financial condition during her last year of employment. The plaintiff had access to the confidential documents as secretary of the company's comptroller, and she took copies home and showed them to her husband. She explained that she had been fearful of...