BEFORE THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION

VINCENT LEWIS, Complainant, and IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION,

vs.

HURL KNIGHT, Respondent.

RULING ON OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE:

1. Respondent objected to the admission of Complainant's Exhibit number 3, which is a listing of repairs performed on a house Complainant Lewis bought after his rejection by Respondent Knight. The grounds for Respondent's objection were relevancy and materiality. Since Complainant Lewis testified that he intended to make no repairs to the Knight property if he had been able to buy it, and incurred these costs on the property he bought after his rejection by the Knights, it is clear that this exhibit was offered as evidence of additional costs incurred by the complainant due to alleged discrimination for which Complainant Lewis seeks compensation.

2. The objection made by the Knights, to the effect that this exhibit should not be admitted because all real property is unique, goes to its weight and not to its relevancy or materiality. This exhibit tends to "make the existence of [a] fact that is of consequence to the determination of the [contested case][i.e. the damages sustained by Complainant] more or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Iowa R. Evid. 401 (definition of relevant evidence). The exhibit is also material as it is pertinent to the issue of damages, which is in dispute. BLACK's LAW DICTIONARY 881 (5th ed. 1979)(citing Vine Street Corp. v. City of Council Bluffs, Iowa, 220 N.W.2d 860, 863) (definition of "material evidence").