The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court did not err in admitting two out-of-court statements from a co-worker and a vendor representative, where those statements conflicted with plaintiff's version of his alleged injury, and where the decision-maker considered those statements prior to firing the plaintiff, since the statements were admissible under state-of-mind exception to hearsay rule. Additionally, both statements were relevant on issue as to whether defendant's proffered reason for plaintiff's termination was pre textual.
The Seventh Circuit further found that the appeal was frivolous and issued rule to show cause directing plaintiff to show why he should not be subjected to Rule 38 sanctions.