A $10 million judgment in a sex harassment, discrimination, and retaliation case is reversed because the trial court erred in admitting into evidence (i) a newspaper article about a 20-year old expunged misdemeanor conviction of the principal defendant, and (ii) me-too evidence by a dis-similar woman (a student vs. plaintiff, a tenured professor) about a different administrator than the principal defendant. Me-too evidence is allowed in employment discrimination cases only when the evidence regards similar treatment (as what plaintiff complains of) of a similarly situated person. This evidence did not meet either prong of that test. In addition, the verdict was very high given that plaintiff had not been fired and suffered no economic harm. Also, in considering post-trial motions, the trial judge made racist and sexist comments that got him disqualified from the case.