Paralegal Certification PrepLitigationMedium
A paralegal is assisting an attorney in a civil trial where the plaintiff is suing for defamation. During cross-examination, the defense attorney asks the plaintiff a question that assumes a fact not yet in evidence. The plaintiff's attorney objects. What is the most appropriate legal ground for this objection?
- ALeading question
- BAssumes facts not in evidence
- CHearsay
- DAsked and answered
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: B. Assumes facts not in evidence
An objection on the grounds of 'assumes facts not in evidence' is proper when a question, typically during cross-examination, includes a factual premise that has not been established through testimony or exhibits.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. A leading question suggests the answer, which is generally allowed on cross-examination, but it doesn't address the assumption of unproven facts.
- C. Hearsay relates to out-of-court statements, not the form of the question.
- D. Asked and answered applies when the same question has already been put to the witness and a response received.
Assumes Facts Not in Evidence
An objection raised when a question, typically on cross-examination, incorporates a factual assertion that has not been established through prior testimony or admitted evidence in the trial.
- Prevents attorneys from subtly introducing unproven facts.
- Forces the attorney to lay a proper foundation for the assumed fact.
- Ensures that questions are based on the evidence presented in court.
Memory trick: Stop improper questions in their tracks.