Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
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. A related objection is non-responsive answer, which means that the witness is not answering the partys or attorneys question.
For instance, suppose that in a personal injury case, an attorney asks a witness during cross-examination, You arrived at the theatre
about 6 p.m., didnt you? If the witness says Yes, the answer is both relevant (assuming the question is relevant) and responsive. If
the witness answers No, because I was selling drugs at the time, the answer is responsive but not relevant to the personal injury
case. If the witness answers, The traffic is awful at 6 p.m., especially down by the waterfront, the answer may be relevant, but it is not
responsive.
A closely-related objection to relevance is the objection that a piece of evidence is inflammatory or
prejudicial. Even if the information is technically relevant, some pieces of information are so hot that they are more likely to upset or
prejudice the jury than they are to give useful information. If a piece of evidence is likely to cause more harm than good, it is likely to be
objected to on these grounds.
Calls for speculation, a legal conclusion, or an impermissible opinion. As a rule, witnesses are expected to answer questions as
truthfully as possible and to stick to the facts. A question that asks the witness to guess what happened or to opine whether or not what
happened meets a certain legal definition (such as negligence) 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.
A related objection is an objection to a narrative response, which is a response in which the witness is allowed to ramble instead of
sticking to answering the question. Some questions, like Then what happened? may elicit longer answers than others, like you live
at 123 Main Street, dont you?, but the witness should still 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. Depending on how theyre counted, there are anywhere from nine to twenty-five or
more hearsay exceptions, however, so a party or 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, very quickly.
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. Questions like you were at the mall last Sunday, werent you?
and your middle name is Marie, isnt that right? are leading questions.
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. A leading question asked outside these circumstances may be
objected to, and the person asking the question may be expected to re-phrase the question so that it is not leading. (Questions like
Where were you last Sunday? and What is your middle name? are not leading.)
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.
A party or attorney who asks a question and hears it objected to as privileged should be prepared to explain why the information is not
privileged. For instance, if the speaker shared the information with a non-privileged party like a co-worker, the privilege is lost, even if
the speaker also shared that information with his spouse, doctor, attorney, or physician.
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.
COMMON TRIAL OBJECTIONS
"Objection, your Honor, the question is ambiguous."
A question is ambiguous if:
It may be misunderstood by the witness. It is objectionable on the ground that it may take on more than one meaning.
"Objection, your Honor, the question is argumentative."
A question is argumentative if:
It is asked for the purpose of persuading the jury or the judge, rather than to elicit information.
It calls for an argument in answer to an argument contained in the question.
It calls for no new facts, but merely asks the witness to concede to inferences drawn by the examiner from proved or assumed facts.
"Objection, your Honor, the question has been asked and answered."
A question may be objectionable on the ground that
The witness has already answered a substantially similar question asked by the same attorney on the same subject matter.
"Objections, your Honor, the question assumes facts not in evidence."