Post by 47a on Jul 8, 2016 18:58:31 GMT
Opening / Closing Statements:
Egregious Behavior: blatantly attempting to damage the reputation of the opposing client through blatant negative language and slanderous actions (ie, name calling)
Beyond the Scope: the contents of the statement are not relevant to the case description, the attorney is not focused on the scope of the case
Evidence:
Lack of foundation: the evidence lacks testimony as to its authenticity or source.
Incomplete: opposing party only introducing part of the writing (conversation/act/declaration), taken out of context, or the evidence contains manipulation used to conceal items on the screen such as drawing or crossing out
Irrelevant: the evidence is irrelevant to the contents of the case
Inaccurate: parts of the evidence are not described, or presented properly, creating a contradictory statement during the presentation (i.e; misspelling of usernames, incorrect information), or is contradictory to previously accepted evidence (i.e; happening at the same time, showing different information)
Witnesses Examinations:
Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, or unintelligible: the question is not clear and precise enough for the witness to properly answer
Asked and answered: when the same attorney continues to ask the same question and they have already received an answer.
Assumes facts not in evidence: the question assumes something as true for which no evidence has been shown. This must be based entirely upon assumption--if the witness
knows the answer, then they aren’t assuming.
Badgering: counsel is antagonizing the witness in order to provoke a response, either by asking questions without giving the witness an opportunity to answer or by openly mocking the witness.
Calls for a conclusion: the question asks for an opinion rather than facts. (ie, do you think he broke the law?)
Calls for speculation: the question asks the witness to guess the answer rather than to rely on known facts.
Hearsay: the witness does not know the answer personally but heard it from another.
Incompetent: the witness is not qualified to answer the question.
Inflammatory: the question is intended to cause prejudice against a member.
Irrelevant or immaterial: the question is not about the issues in the trial.
Non-responsive: the witness's response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all
Nothing pending: the witness continues to speak on matters irrelevant to the question.
Egregious Behavior: blatantly attempting to damage the reputation of the opposing client through blatant negative language and slanderous actions (ie, name calling)
Beyond the Scope: the contents of the statement are not relevant to the case description, the attorney is not focused on the scope of the case
Evidence:
Lack of foundation: the evidence lacks testimony as to its authenticity or source.
Incomplete: opposing party only introducing part of the writing (conversation/act/declaration), taken out of context, or the evidence contains manipulation used to conceal items on the screen such as drawing or crossing out
Irrelevant: the evidence is irrelevant to the contents of the case
Inaccurate: parts of the evidence are not described, or presented properly, creating a contradictory statement during the presentation (i.e; misspelling of usernames, incorrect information), or is contradictory to previously accepted evidence (i.e; happening at the same time, showing different information)
Witnesses Examinations:
Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, or unintelligible: the question is not clear and precise enough for the witness to properly answer
Asked and answered: when the same attorney continues to ask the same question and they have already received an answer.
Assumes facts not in evidence: the question assumes something as true for which no evidence has been shown. This must be based entirely upon assumption--if the witness
knows the answer, then they aren’t assuming.
Badgering: counsel is antagonizing the witness in order to provoke a response, either by asking questions without giving the witness an opportunity to answer or by openly mocking the witness.
Calls for a conclusion: the question asks for an opinion rather than facts. (ie, do you think he broke the law?)
Calls for speculation: the question asks the witness to guess the answer rather than to rely on known facts.
Hearsay: the witness does not know the answer personally but heard it from another.
Incompetent: the witness is not qualified to answer the question.
Inflammatory: the question is intended to cause prejudice against a member.
Irrelevant or immaterial: the question is not about the issues in the trial.
Non-responsive: the witness's response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all
Nothing pending: the witness continues to speak on matters irrelevant to the question.