What are some common objections?

Here are some common reasons for objecting, which may appear in your
state’s rules of evidence.

To skip to a specific section, click on the name of that

objection: Relevance, Unfair/prejudicial, Leading question, Compound
question, Argumentative, Asked and answered, Vague, Foundation
issues, Non-responsive, Speculation, Opinion, Hearsay

Relevance
You can object to the relevance of evidence if you think a piece of evidence or
something a witness is saying has nothing to do with the case or it is not
important in determining who should win in court.

Example: Asking how many sexual partners someone has had wouldn’t be
relevant in a protection order case.

Unfair/prejudicial
You can object to evidence, even if it’s relevant, if the evidence would unfairly
turn the judge or jury against you. This is what is meant by saying the
evidence is prejudicial.

Example: Evidence that one of the parties has been in jail before may be
relevant, but that evidence may also be unfairly prejudicial if it paints the party
in a bad light to the judge or jury.

Leading question
If the other party poses a question on direct examination that leads the
witness to a certain answer, then you can object to the question as leading.
This is usually the case with “yes” or “no” questions. Keep in mind that the
judge might allow some leading questions during direct examination for simple
background information to move the testimony along faster. For example, let’s
say the other party’s mother is testifying, the judge might allow the question
“You are the respondent’s mother, correct?” instead of “How do you know the
respondent?” However, when someone is asking about issues that directly
relate to the case, leading a witness is not allowed.

Example: On direct examination, this leading question could be objected to:

“The car that you saw leave the scene of the robbery was blue, right?”
 Instead, it should be asked: “What color was the car that you saw leaving the
scene of the robbery?”

Compound question
A compound question is when two or more questions are combined as one
question. Compound questions are not allowed because they can confuse the
witness, the judge, and the jury. Also, it may not be clear for the court record
which of the questions the witness is answering.

If you find yourself asking a compound question, don’t get flustered with the
other party’s objection and skip the issue entirely. Just separate out the
questions, ask them one at a time, and they might then be allowed.

Example: Why did you go back into the house and what made you think you it
was a good idea to then take the children away?

Argumentative
When the person asking cross-examination questions begins to argue with the
witness, known as “badgering the witness,” then the other party can object to
the questioning as argumentative.

Example:

 Opposing party’s attorney: “You are not afraid of my client, correct?”

o You: “Yes, I am.”
 Opposing party’s attorney: “Oh come on, how can you be afraid of a guy
who weighs 120 lbs when you weigh 300 lbs?”
o You: “I am afraid of him no matter his weight.”
 Opposing party’s attorney: “Well, you didn’t look very afraid to me when
you walked into court today.”
o You: “Objection, Your Honor, argumentative.”

Asked and answered

Sometimes during cross-examination, the person asking questions might ask
the same question over and over again, perhaps in slightly different ways, or
re-ask a question s/he had asked earlier in the testimony. What’s unique
about this objection is that it could come up in two different scenarios, First,
opposing counsel could repeatedly ask you or your witness the same
question, hoping that contradicting answers will be given. Second, opposing
counsel could repeatedly ask his/her own client the same question in
slightly different ways, hoping that the client will give a better answer than one
 given before. Either way, a question can only be asked once, and after it has
been answered, any further attempts to ask the question are objectionable.

Example:

 Other party: “Do you remember when I wrote you a check for $10,000?”
o You: “No, that never happened.”
 Other party: “You’re saying that I didn’t write you a check for $10,000?”
o You: “No, you didn’t.”
 Other party: “I’m talking about last year, you remember, the check I
wrote for you, right?”
o You: “Objection Your Honor, asked and answered.”

Vague
A vague question is when it is difficult or impossible to tell what the question is
about. You would want to object to a vague question that is asked of your
witness because of the risk that the witness will misunderstand the question
and say something that will hurt your case. If the question is objected to, the
person asking the question might then be able to ask the question in a
different way that makes more sense or is more specific.

Example: Let’s say the opposing party asks “Can you tell the court where you
went earlier?” The term “earlier” is not specific enough; it’s vague. After an
objection, the question could be rephrased to say “Can you tell the court
where you went this morning right before you came to court?”

In addition, a question that refers to “this” or “that” might be too vague if there
is no context as to what “this” or “that” refers to.

Foundation issues
A question or response can be objectionable if a person failed to explain the
background circumstances of how s/he knows the information s/he is
testifying about, or are being asked about. When answering about specific
facts, the witness has to set the stage and explain how s/he knows the
information that s/he knows.

Example: A person can’t testify that it was a certain person’s voice on the
phone, without first explaining that s/he had spoken with the person many
times over the last few years and the call came from the same number.
 Non-responsive
When a witness starts responding to a question with information that is
completely unrelated to the question, you can object to it as being “non-
responsive.” This can be especially important in cross-examination when you
are looking for very specific “yes” or “no” answers.

Example:

 You: “Isn’t it true that you put your hands around my neck after you
pushed me on the ground?”
o Other party: “Well, yes I did.”
 You: “When I broke free, isn’t that how you got the bruises on your
arms?”
o “Look, I didn’t mean to hurt you, I was just trying to get your
attention and….”
 You: “Objection Your Honor, the answer is non-responsive.”
 Judge: “Please answer the question sir.”

In addition, sometimes when a witness is being questioned on direct

examination, s/he will make an effort to explain away a bad answer during the
next question, regardless of what the question asked is. This is another
instance when you could object to the non-responsive answer.

Example:

 Other party’s lawyer: “How many time did you see your children last
month?
o Other party: “Once.”
 Other party’s lawyer: “When is your next visit scheduled for?”
o Other party: “The reason I only saw them once last month is
because their mother likes to play games and hang the children over my head
and…”
 You: “Objection, Judge, non-responsive!”

Speculation
The speculation objection can be used in two different situations. First, if a
witness does not know a fact to be true or not, but testifies about it anyway,
this testimony would be objectionable as speculation. A witness must have
personal knowledge of a fact to testify about that fact and put it into the court
record.
 Example: A witness could not testify that s/he thinks a person left the house at
8:00 pm unless s/he actually saw the person leave the house, or s/he has
some other valid basis for that belief.

Second, if a question that is posed can only be answered by using

speculation, the question would be objectionable.

Example:

 Opposing attorney: “What do you think your sister was thinking when
she left?”
o You: “Objection, Your Honor, the question calls for speculation.”

Opinion
If a witness testifies about an opinion s/he has that is technical in nature and
not based on any facts the witness has first-hand knowledge of, then you may
be able to object based on it being their opinion. Generally, only a witness
who has been recognized as an expert witness by the judge can offer an
opinion.

Example: An abuser cannot testify that you are “crazy.” S/he can testify about
behaviors s/he might have witnessed that s/he finds concerning. However,
any testimony that might suggest some sort of diagnosis would usually be
objectionable as opinion. Similarly, you could not testify definitively that the
substance you found in the abuser’s glovebox was cocaine unless it was
tested by a lab or the abuser admitted it. You could testify that you saw “a
white powdery substance in a baggie that appeared to be cocaine,” based on
your understanding of the drug and what you looked up online. However, a
judge may allow testimony such as “I am a good mother” or “He is a good
father” even though that is an opinion.

Hearsay
A person can only testify as to what s/he knows to be true, not what s/he
heard from someone else. If a witness tries to testify about what a non-party
told him/her or tries to enter into evidence something in writing that a non-
party wrote, then the testimony or written evidence is objectionable as
hearsay. However, there are hearsay exceptions that may apply. You can
learn more in What is hearsay? and What are some hearsay exceptions?

What is hearsay?
 Technically, hearsay is defined as “an out-of-court statement admitted for the
truth of the matter asserted.” To understand what hearsay means, we will
break down each part of the definition:

 A statement can be what someone said out loud or a statement might

also be written or typed on a document, like a letter, an email, a text message,
a voicemail, or some other kind of record.
 Out of court means simply that the statement being entered into
evidence, either through testimony or written on a document, was said or
created outside of the courtroom and not during the trial or hearing.
 Admitted means given, presented, or entered in the court hearing. So,
in most cases, it is evidence or testimony that a party, or a party’s witness, is
giving to the court for the judge to consider when s/he makes a decision about
the case.
 For the truth of the matter asserted means that the evidence or
testimony is being presented to the court as proof of the fact contained in the
statement. So, in other words, you want the judge to believe that whatever
you testify that someone else said to you or what you show the judge that
someone else wrote is true and you want the judge to rely on that information.

Whether or not you are offering a statement to the judge “for the truth of the
matter” can depend on the context of the case. The same statement could be
offered for two different reasons and one reason may not be hearsay. For
example, if a witness testifies “He said ‘The weather sure is great today!’” this
might not be hearsay if it is admitted just to show that someone said those
words to the witness when they met. In other words, if the witness wants to
show that this is how he greeted her. However, if the weather on a certain day
is a major issue in the case, and the witness says “He said ‘The weather sure
is great today!’” as a way to prove that the weather was, in fact, great, then a
statement like this would be hearsay.

Let’s look at some examples of how to spot hearsay within the different types
of evidence:

1) In testimony - In most instances, if a question asks for what a person said,

or when a witness begins a sentence by saying “She said…” or “He said…”
you will probably be able to object based on hearsay. For example:

 Questions that call for hearsay are objectionable:

o “What did he say to you?”
o “Can you tell me what the letter said?”
 Testimony about what someone else said is hearsay:
o “His sister told me that he has guns under his bed.”
o “My doctor said that I have a concussion.”
o “The teacher pulled me aside and said Johnny has been hitting
other students.”

Remember, sometimes, a witness might be saying what the other person

said, just to show that the other person said something, anything. If the
content of what was said does not matter for the court case, then it is possible
that the statement is not “admitted for the matter asserted,” and therefore it is
not hearsay. For example:

 Testimony that is not trying to prove a fact about the case is

not hearsay:
o “The officer said to stay calm.”

2) In documents – Letters, reports, texts, emails, or other documents that

originated out of court can be excluded based on hearsay, unless they qualify
for a hearsay exception, which many will. The following might all technically
contain statements that are hearsay, and thus could be excluded from
evidence – however, for many of these listed, exceptions apply that could
allow them to be admitted into evidence:

 letters;
 texts;
 emails;
 Facebook posts;
 utility bills;
 caseworkers’ notes;
 hospital records;
 police reports;
 report cards;
 therapists’ notes;
 drug test results.

If you plan to admit a document like one listed here into evidence, you should
look through the hearsay exceptions and think about which would apply in
your situation. The other side might not object to the documents, or the
hearsay rules might be more relaxed in the court you are in, but it is good to
know which exception will allow your evidence, just in case it becomes an
issue.

What are some hearsay exceptions?

Most courts do not allow hearsay evidence, unless it qualifies for a hearsay
exception, because it is considered to not be reliable evidence. However,
hearsay evidence or testimony can be valuable evidence for judges or juries
when deciding a case. In some situations, the only way a person can get a
certain fact in front of the judge might be with evidence that is technically
hearsay. Therefore, the rules that cover trials (“rules of evidence”) contain
exceptions for evidence that might otherwise be considered hearsay when
there is something about it that makes it more reliable than typical hearsay
evidence. You can look to your state’s rules of evidence for a complete list of
exceptions. The following are the most common hearsay exceptions that you
might encounter:

Admission by the other party (known as “admission by a party-

opponent” or “admission against interest”): Statements made by the other
party that can be used against him/her will often qualify under this hearsay
exception. When the other party says something out of court way before
anyone knew that there would be a lawsuit, it’s considered likely that the party
was telling the truth at that time. This is why it is possible that it may be
admitted as an admission by the other party, even if the statement is
technically hearsay. For example, if the other party once admitted to his
friend, “Whenever I am watching my daughter, I lock her in her room so that I
can have my friends over to party without her bothering me,” the friend could
testify to this on the witness stand in your custody hearing.

This exception could also include documents that you want to introduce as
evidence that might otherwise be considered hearsay, like letters, text
messages, Facebook posts, etc. that were written by the other party.

Excited utterance: An excited utterance is a statement that a person makes

immediately after a startling event. Statements made out of excitement are
considered to be more reliable because a person is not thinking as much
about what s/he is saying. The classic example is a recorded 911 call, which
is made immediately after a traumatic incidence. Even if the person who made
the call is not testifying, the recording of the phone call can be admitted as
evidence under this exception.
Prior inconsistent statement: If a witness or a party says something while
testifying that differs from a statement s/he made previously, the prior
statement may be admissible under this exception. This most often occurs
when there have been depositions, and a witness makes a statement during
the trial that is not consistent with his/her testimony in the deposition. This is
an important exception that is often used during cross-examination. If you
hear a witness testify differently than what you remember him/her saying at
depositions, you can question the witness about it. If s/he is not willing to
admit to the prior statement that s/he made, you can read the witness’s prior
statement from the deposition transcript into the court record while s/he is
testifying to say, “Isn’t it true that today you said X, but in the deposition that
you gave on [date], you said Y.”

Statement for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment: A statement

that you make to a doctor or another healthcare professional about symptoms
you are experiencing may qualify for a hearsay exception. For example, if you
are riding to the hospital in an ambulance because your leg is broken, and you
tell the EMT that your partner ran over your leg with the car, the EMT could
testify about what you told him/her.

Statement against interest (also called a “declaration against interest”):

If a person who is not a party to the case made a statement that is against
his/her legal or financial interest, then it might qualify for a hearsay exception.
However, in order to use this exception, the person who made this out-of-
court statement must be “unavailable” to testify at the trial for reasons such as
refusing to follow a subpoena to testify, serious illness, or death.

Business record: Records that are kept by a business, government, or other

organization in the regular course of business may qualify for a hearsay
exception. This might be hospital records, inventory statements, rent balance
sheets, utility bills, report cards, or other documents. To qualify for this
exception, you might have to get certified records from the business or
organization that generated the records instead of just using a copy that you
have on hand or that you print out. Or, you might have to call someone from
that organization as a witness to testify as to their business practices with
regard to keeping records before the judge will allow you to enter the records
into evidence.

Public record: Records that are kept in the public domain might also qualify
for a hearsay exception. This can include birth records, marriage certificates,
or sometimes, police records and other documents that are kept in an official
capacity.