Admissibility of Settlement Discussions Involving Different Disputes

• Jurisdiction: Colorado,United States
• Citation: Vol. 22 No. 8 Pg. 1695
• Pages: 1695
• Publication year: 1993

22 Colo.Law. 1695 Colorado Lawyer 1993.

1993, August, Pg. 1695. Admissibility of Settlement Discussions Involving Different Disputes

---

1695

Vol. 22, No. 8, Pg. 1695

Admissibility of Settlement Discussions Involving Different Disputes

by Keith Hotle

Q: Does Rule 408 of the Colorado Rules of Evidence bar admission into evidence of a statement made during settlement negotiations in a dispute other than the one being litigated?

A: Probably yes, unless the evidence is offered for a purpose other than to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim at issue or its amount.

ASSUMED FACTS

Billy Bob, Inc. ("Billy Bob"), is a successful cattle breeding company, employing fifteen workers---all male. Winona Rudd applies for a job in June 1991, in response to Billy Bob's advertisement in a local trade magazine. Despite her Ph.D. in animal husbandry and substantial experience in the field of cattle breeding, the job goes to Clint White, an unemployed attorney with no training or prior experience in the field. Winona sues for sex discrimination and reaches a favorable settlement with Billy Bob.

Approximately a year later, Billy Bob again advertises for a cattle breeding position and again hires an inexperienced and unqualified male, despite applications from several women applicants with obviously superior credentials. One of the applicants, Reba Macintosh, has sued Billy Bob for sex discrimination. At trial, Reba seeks to enter evidence of statements made at the settlement conference between Billy Bob and Winona regarding Billy Bob's hiring practices. Billy Bob's attorney objects under Rule 408 of the Colorado Rules of Evidence. What is the result?

DISCUSSION

Rule 408 of the Colorado Rules of Evidence provides, in relevant part:

Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible.... This rule also does not require exclusion when the evidence is offered for another purpose.

No Colorado appellate opinion has addressed whether Rule 408 is applicable to statements made in settlement discussions that occurred in another...