Checklist of common objections
* By: F. Dennis Saylor IV and Daniel I. Small ) May 31, 2018
As a practical matter, of course, most objections have to be made at high speed in the heat of battle, with little or
no time for reflection. But that doesn’t mean that you can’t prepare yourself to make objections when you have to.
One of the best ways to do that is to familiarize yourself with the most common objections and their short-hand
descriptions.
Questions may be objectionable because they violate one of the “big four” evidentiary principles (relevance,
authentication, hearsay, privilege) or because they violate Rule 403 (generally, because the answer would be
unfairly prejudicial). Those types of objections tend to be case-specific, and tied to the facts and the specific
requirements of the evidentiary rules (for example, the various exceptions to the hearsay rule).
Because of pre-trial discovery and other disclosure requirements, you can usually anticipate how you might want to
object to your opponent’s evidence, and what he or she might say about yours.
It’s harder to anticipate questions that have an improper form, or that are improper only because of their context
(for example, a repetitive question). Still, it helps a lot to know the basics. Here are some typical ways in which a
question might draw an objection:
1. Ambiguous
The question is capable of more than one interpretation. This problem often arises from the use of ambiguous
pronouns, particularly the word “that.” An objection for “vagueness” is similar. Example: “Did you see that?”
2. Argumentative
The question is not designed to elicit facts but to argue the case. Example: “Isn’t it true you ran the red light
because you were drunk and didn’t have control of your car?”
3. Assumes fact not in evidence
The question assumes a fact is true as to which no evidence has yet been elicited. Example: Counsel asks, “Where
were you when you signed this document?” before it has been established that the witness in fact signed the
document.
4. Calls for expert opinion
The question asks a lay witness to give an opinion that properly may be given only by an expert. Example: “Why do
you think your leg took so long to heal?”
5. Calls for narrative response
The question is open-ended and general. Whether such a question is permissible depends on context; such a
question is normally permitted if the answer is likely to be relatively short (for example, a single sentence) and not
permitted if it would invite the witness to talk at length. Example: “What happened?”
6. Compound
The question has multiple parts or gives the witness a limited range of alternatives (usually two). Compound
questions usually include the word “or” or “and.” Examples: “Was the car blue and was the traffic light green?”
“Was the car blue or yellow?”