How to object in court

Tips & Tactics

Objection: Facts Not In Evidence!

Not infrequently you'll catch a lawyer "reminding" the court of facts that have never been properly introduced into evidence ... no documents, no witness testimony, nothing but the lawyer's sneaky wordwork!

This will happen at hearings, at depositions, at trial, and in written memoranda, motions, and other papers submitted to the court.

You must stop it immediately with a timely objection!

Such facts will be sneaked in. You can count on it, if the other side is represented by a lawyer. It usually happens because the lawyer doesn't have any witnesses, documents, or other things he can bring to court that might tend to establish the facts fairly by the use of admissible evidence ... so the lawyer cheats!

His case is weak, and he knows it.

He also knows it's against the rules for him to mention facts that are not in evidence ... but expect him to do it anyway.

If he can't call a witness to get the evidence in, and he can't find some tangible item or document of some kind to get the evidence in, he'll just go ahead and talk about it as if it were already an established fact ... if you allow it by failing to object!

Usually, the lawyer will simply go ahead and state the fact himself while examining a witness or during his closing statement ... when there is nothing in evidence to support it ... and hope you don't notice that he has offered inadmissible evidence unlawfully.

You will notice, if you are a Jurisdictionary student!

You will stand to your feet at once!

"Objection, your Honor. Facts not in evidence."

If the judge is a good one, he will instruct the lawyer to confine his recitation of facts to those that have already been admitted and, if it's a jury case, he will instruct the jury to disregard the lawyer's statement.

Here's an example. Consider yourself the defendant in a breach of contract suit. You've been accused of taking 300 gallons of red paint from plaintiff's warehouse without paying for it.

The lawyer on the other side is working hard to prove you owe his client money, and he is trying to paint his client in the best possible light, trying to show his client is an honest fellow who would never sue someone without cause ... even if he has to break the rules to do so!

He off-handedly says, "My client was busy working as a volunteer at his church soup kitchen while the defendant was stealing paint from my client's store."

There are no facts in evidence to support this statement.

The lawyer hasn't called any witnesses to corroborate either fact.

No documents nor anything else has been presented to the court to substantiate this biased claim.

The lawyer is testifying (in itself objectionable, as you'll learn in our complete self-help course) but the facts he offers have not been presented to the court by any witnesses, documents, or other things that might make those facts admissible.

You stand to your feet at once and say, "Objection. Facts not in evidence."

It is clearly permissible for a lawyer to remind the court what a particular witness may have testified when previously questioned. If a witness offered evidence that you did load paint into your truck on such-and-such date at such-and-such time, then it's perfectly permissible for the lawyer to remind the court by saying something like, "The court will recall the testimony of the plaintiff's secretary, Miss Scarlet, who told how she was enjoying a cigarette on the loading dock that day when she saw the defendant back his truck up to the warehouse door and carry the plaintiff's paint away."

That's not only permissible - it is good lawyering and perfectly proper.

It is equally permissible for the lawyer to offer evidence that his client was at his church serving soup to the homeless on that date and at that time, provided he does so by offering competent witness testimony, original documents, or other things that tend to prove what he says. If he previously called the priest or pastor of the church to the stand and obtained competent testimony reporting that the plaintiff was doling out soup at the time of the alleged taking, then he can remind the court of evidence already admitted. It may be objectionable on the grounds it isn't relevant where the pastor was when the paint was allegedly taken, but is otherwise good lawyering, if the facts are in evidence when the lawyer mentions them.

It is never permissible for a lawyer (or pro se litigant) to simply offer facts without corroboration.

Never.

Object on both grounds!

"Counsel is testifying."

"Facts not in evidence."

Lawyers are not supposed to "prove" cases by clever legal argument supported by their own version of the facts ... yet you can count on them to do so IF YOU DON'T OBJECT!

A lawyer's version of the facts is, by itself, inadmissible and will be excluded by a good judge if you object!

It is your job to require the opponent's lawyer to prove his clients' right-to-win by presenting admissible evidence ... and admissible evidence only!

If the lawyer does otherwise, object!

If you do not control the lawyer on the other side, the lawyer will do whatever he can to win his case ... and most judges will allow it, if you don't object!

Don't trust the lawyer on the other side, no matter how clean-cut and well-dressed he may appear. There's a good reason why there are more jokes about lawyers than any other profession. Too many lawyers are outright crooks, eagerly willing to twist the law at every opportunity.

And, don't expect the judge to control the opposing party's lawyer for you! He won't in most cases. It isn't his job. He is responsible to rule on objections. He cannot rule if you don't object!

It's up to you to object!

So, object ... and, if necessary, renew your objections (as we teach in our tutorial on objections that's included in the complete Jurisdictionary self-help for non-lawyers course).

And, if the court refuses to rule, move the court to do so!

And, if that doesn't work, object once again - and make certain the court reporter is getting every word!

If you have a lawyer, don't trust him to object when needed. Many lawyers will not object, simply because they don't want to upset the judge! Go the extra mile. Make certain. Command your own lawyer, if you have one ... and don't pay for services you aren't getting! If the lawyer won't object, stand to your feet and say, "Your honor! I just fired my lawyer, and I object! Facts not in evidence!"

When an objection is due, make it, and get the judge to rule on it.

Jurisdictionary explains this and more in our 2-day, 4-CD, step-by-step lawsuit self-help course for non-lawyers.

We make it easy for you to learn how to control crooked lawyers so you can win your lawsuit ... with or without a lawyer!

Learning isn't expensive. You can grasp the essential concepts in a single weekend with our affordable 4-CD step-by-step course!

Get our Self-Help for Non-Lawyers Course. Still only $219

============================================

Learn how easy it is to win YOUR lawsuit!

Ask anyone who has our course. "Jurisdictionary Works!"

Visit www.Jurisdictionary.com to learn more!

============================================

Our 4-CD step-by-step course includes: