RAMOGA, Cynnest Kaye S.

LLB 3 Trial Technique 18 December 2017

Relevance. In order to be admissible in court, evidence must be relevant, or relate in some

way to the issues being argued about at trial.

Non-responsive answer, which means that the witness is not answering the partys
or attorneys question.

Calls for speculation, a legal conclusion, or an impermissible opinion. A question that

asks the witness to guess what happened or to opine whether or not what happened meets a
certain legal definition may be objected to because it doesnt stick to facts the witness
observed. Expert witnesses, however, are generally allowed to offer opinions based on their
expertise.

Narrative response is a response in which the witness is allowed to ramble instead of sticking
to answering the question. The witness should stick to statements that describe facts the
witness personally observed and that answer the question.

Hearsay. One of the best-known objections, hearsay points out that a piece of evidence is a
statement made out of court by someone whom the court cannot cross-examine. An attorney
who receives an objection based on hearsay needs to be able to name the correct exception, or
explain why the evidence is not hearsay.

Leading question. Leading questions are questions that suggest their own answers and are
usually asked in a yes or no format that prompts the person being questioned to go along
with the questioner. Leading questions are permitted during cross-examination but not
during direct examination, unless the witness is hostile or unwilling to cooperate with the
attorney or party questioning her.

Privilege. Privileged information generally can be kept out of court, even if it is

relevant. The most common privileges are the spousal privilege, covering information shared
between married partners; the doctor-patient privilege, covering information shared during
medical treatment; the attorney-client privilege, covering information shared or discovered
between an attorney and the person she represents; and the priest-penitent privilege, covering
information shared during confession or pastoral counseling.

Lack of foundation. The objection lack of foundation most often applies to exhibits or
pieces of evidence other than testimony that are brought into court without an explanation of
where they came from or what they represent. Foundation is usually laid by having a witness
testify as to what the object is.
Form of the question. This objection is usually asserted to make a clear record. Form
questions fall in several categories. Some jurisdictions only require that the lawyer state a
general form objection. Others require that the type of form objection be stated as well. Form
questions are waived if they are not made during the deposition.

Compound. If the question is compound and the person answers yes, what portion of the
question are they agreeing with? For example, if your client is asked When you turned left
were you in the turn lane and was your signal on and was the light green and how do you
know object! Ask the lawyer to ask one question at a time.

Confusing. Although it is improper to ask for clarification, but it depends; If the question is
truly confusing, an objection may be proper.

Calls for speculation. A form objection should also be made to a question that calls for the
witness to speculate. Be careful, though. Dont suggest an answer, which would not be proper.

Mischaracterizes earlier testimony. This is also to make sure there is a clear record. For
example, if the deponent earlier stated he was not sure of his speed, and was then asked: So
you testified earlier that you were speeding it is proper to object as mischaracterizing earlier
testimony. The deponent said she did not know how fast she was going; she did not admit she
was speeding.

Asked and answered. This is a useful objection to make sure that your client doesnt give a
different answer than he gave earlier in the deposition. If you dont make the objection and
your client does provide differing information, your client loses credibility. And the testimony
can be used for impeachment at trial. The opposing lawyer may not realize that he asked the
question earlier, and making the objection can throw him off and make him doubt himself.

Calls for a legal conclusion. Deponents are there to testify about facts, not legal conclusions.
If the deponent is a lawyer, it may be a proper question, depending on the circumstances.
Otherwise, its not.

Harassment. If the deponent is being harassed or bullied, object. If that behavior continues,
describe the specific conduct that is objectionable for the record, and further state on the
record that you will terminate the deposition if the behavior continues. Make sure the record
will be clear to an outsider (i.e. the judge) that the witness was being harassed or bullied. As
with privilege, if the lawyer does not stop the harassment, terminate the deposition.
BARRO, MICHAEL P. LLB-3

Misleading
One objection which a lawyer might raise is an objection based on the grounds that
the question being objected to was ambiguous, misleading, confusing, vague, or
unintelligible. All of these terms mean generally similar things, although they do
have some nuance between them. Ultimately, however, an ambiguous, misleading,
confusing, vague, or unintelligible question is a question without a clear, obvious,
succinct, factual answer.

Argumentative
A lawyer is not permitted to be argumentative with a witness in any given trial. This
means that a lawyer is not permitted to repeatedly ask the same question of a
witness, nor is the lawyer allowed to directly dispute what the witness says in the
manner of an argument. Any such questions might be objected to on the grounds
that they are argumentative.

Asked and Answered

Once a question has been asked and answered, it is generally not allowed for that
question to be asked again. If the question is asked again, then the opposing
lawyer might object based on the grounds that the question has been asked and
answered. Sometimes, lawyers will attempt to repeat questions for the sake of
emphasis, and this is disallowed through asked and answered objections.

Speculation
A speculative question or speculative evidence is normally disallowed from a trial on
the grounds that it is not based in fact. Speculation arises when a witness is asked
to answer a question to which he or she does not know the immediate, factual
answer, or when a witness provides an answer which is not based on immediate
facts of his or her experience. A lawyer can object to speculation to have it
disallowed.

Hearsay
When a lawyer objects to evidence based on hearsay, the lawyer is objecting to a
type of evidence which is related secondhand, from questions asked or answers
given outside of the court. If, for example, an individual is relating evidence based
on what he or she was told by another person outside of court, then that would be
hearsay evidence, and could be objected to.

Incompetent
An attorney might raise an objection based on grounds of incompetence if a witness
were not considered to be competent for providing answers to questions. A witness
might be considered incompetent if he or she were not mentally competent and
stable, or if he or she were particularly young, for example.

Inflammatory
An inflammatory statement or question is a question which is designed to produce a
reaction within the jury, particularly in terms of inflaming the jury against a witness
or the defendant. An inflammatory statement or question is normally grounds for
an objection and for the disallowing of the question or the evidence, as it is
manipulative and irrelevant.

Leading Questions
Leading questions are questions which are designed to suggest an answer within
the question. Leading questions are often yes or no questions, though not all yes or
no questions could be accused of leading the witness. Leading the witness is
objectionable only if the lawyer asking the leading questions is examining his or her
own witness, and is not asking questions of a hostile witness.

Privilege
Objections based on privilege are objections based on the notion that a witness
does not have to give testimony or evidence in certain areas if that witness holds
privilege of particular types. For example, a doctor witness might not have to
provide answers to questions that violate the privilege of doctor patient
confidentiality.

Immaterial
Immaterial questions, or irrelevant questions, can be objected to by the opposing
counsel within a trial on the grounds that they are not important to the matter at
stake in the trial. Immaterial questions are often designed for another,
manipulative purpose, which is why they are made objectionable.

Narrative
An objection to questions which might result in narration on the part of the witness
is allowed because narrative answers do not give opposing counsel the opportunity
to object to questions or evidence prior to the introduction of those questions or
evidence.