How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Dimitry K., Esq. Your Own Question
Dimitry K., Esq.
Dimitry K., Esq., Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 41220
Experience:  Multiple jurisdictions, specialize in business/contract disputes, estate creation and administration.
18572087
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Dimitry K., Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Hello Dimitry, Same thing - I cannot reply. However, when

This answer was rated:

Hello Dimitry,

Same thing - I cannot reply. However, when it was "Access denied" for rating too, somehow I saw that it actually passed. Anyway, there is not much left.

There is just one evidence/allegation and you know all my questions since they are around one and the same thing: did I have legal intent and if petitioner knew/could know/wrongly interpreted it. So, if you'll give me major objections and my rebuttal I hope it will work in most of cases. By the way, I need to object too.
Customer

Sure thing, I will be happy to provide you with the major biggies. It so happened that last week I was judging a 'mock trial' competition as their 'judge' so I also ended up refreshing myself on the possible objections.

Here they are:

1. Objection pertaining to relevance. I think at this point I defined it for you, but if not it is an objection where the subject matter is not related to the questioning or the case. For example asking someone on the stand what they had for dinner during that day, if the food is not really important to the case would not be relevant and could be objected. In some cases bringing up past criminal history may not be relevant since past acts do not really have anything to do with the current case. These are jst some basic examples, so when the attorney or you ask questions, look to how the question is really related to the subject matter, and if you cannot see the logic, it can possibly be objected to.

2. Objection, question and answer. This is where you ask the same question over and over. Judges hate that, it wastes time. It is also sometimes called 'badgering the witness'. Once a point is made, move on, or the judge will cut off that line of questioning.

3. Ambiguity objection. This is where the question is unclear, confusing, or impossible to answer--and this may be something that the attorney can hit you with if he does not understand your questions.

4. Argumentative objection. This is where you are not asking a question but trying to draw a legal conclusion instead--while you can ask yes or no questions and ask what a person felt, you cannot make a legal argument as your question to the witness.

5. Compound question objection. This is where you ask more than one question at once so a person cannot answer it--this is why I suggested to you to split up your question.

6. Speculation objection. This is fairly tricky--in this objection you ask the witness to speculate or guess at the answer and not base it on facts--this was why I kept telling you not to ask her about what she thought you thought or our state of mind--she cannot answer it, and neither can you answer it about her.

7. Assumes facts not in evidence. If your emails do not get in, this may be something you will see, where the other party can object to comments from emails if those emails are not granted as permitted in evidence.

There are more, but likely these are the most important for your case. Please let me know if I can assist further.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

Thank you Dimitry,


 


And my rebuttal (properly formulated) to them?


 



My possible objections?


 


Thank you.


 


Customer/p>
Customer

Everything I listed can be used by you or against you. In terms of rebuttals you would need to find a reason why something is not as charged. For example in a relevance objection,a rebuttal may be that the line of questioning is relevant because it is laying a foundation for a question directly related to the case. For ambiguity it is better to rephrase or ask the witness if she understands the question, many of these simply allow you to restate without the need to rebut. Speculation rebuttal may be overturned if you are asking the witness to guess based on her knowledge and on her best known facts, and that you are seeking a first impression rather than a direct response. Again, it is potentially tough, but it would require you to think and respond right away if you can based on what you are trying to establish.

Good luck.
Customer

As requested, I will respond in this post with your concerns:

I mean properly formulated (Is there anything I MUST move to put in Order of Proof? - or whatever the exact name)- and my own possible objections (you know that "emotional" paragraph so it is simple to guess the direct). I'll also try to reply to your previous comments - characters permit.

The standard is fairly simple..."Objection...reason...explanation". "Objection....relevance...counselor is bringing up subject matter unrelated to the event without a logical conclusion" Response: "Your Honor, this line of questioning will shortly lead to a specific fact related to the case and is laying a foundation." Or "Your Honor, I will withdraw the question". Or "Your Honor, I will restate the question".

It is otherwise very hard for me to guess what the potential objection may be, this is why I am using one example here, but the standard is really the same with each.
Dimitry K., Esq. and 4 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you

Related Legal Questions