Misleading
Hearsay
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.
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.