scj09 Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 JDB's witness will be testifying via telephone. Can I object to them testifying?In other words...As soon as the lawyer calls them as a witness do I just say "I object your honor"? Then tell the judge that the witness has no personal knowledge etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrokeBob Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I don't know about Colorado law. In Wisconsin, I send a motion in to the court and the plaintiff's atty demanding appearance in person. I even quoted some famous studies about body language. The result: they showed up in person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scj09 Posted December 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Thank you for your response. It's too late for motions. Trial is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrokeBob Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 You really need to read up on the Colorado court practices, and FAST! If they warned you ahead of time, you may have waived your right to object. I don't know. You can always try objecting during the trial. If it doesn't work the first time, you will know not to try it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikkivs Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Whoa! I've never heard about a case where a person from the OC or JDB actually showed up in person. What was the outcome of the case? Were you able to impeach the witness? What cases did you use regarding body language? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrokeBob Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 This is Wisconsin. Trueq has done this as well. I found a Wisconsin law saying that the phone is permissible, if all parties agree. So, I objected. I made the plaintiff's lawyer drive in from Milwaukee, about 1.5 hours away. I also made the plaintiff's law firm switch lawyers, since I objected to their previous atty. Trueq faxed me the rules about summary judgment in Wisconsin, it is apparently a violation of the ethics code to be both an affiant and an advocate, so I objected to the atty as well. The plaintiff didn't have all the evidence, so they will have to drive in again. In January. In Wisconsin. Depending on the weather, that could take from 1.5 hours to 5 hours. Trueq forced a lawyer to drive 4 hours each way, rather than appear by phone. Oh, and the court did something really nice to me. I have 2 cases with the same judge, so they arranged hearing back to back. Meanwhile, I will force two different lawyers to drive in from Milwaukee. In January. In Wisconsin. 8-) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikkivs Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Oh I see! Thanks for the response. Given the specifics of your situation, it is unlikely that they will make the trip under inclement weather conditions. Best wishes with your cases:) And Yes, TQ is an angel:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrokeBob Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) You never know. It could be perfectly clear, with perfect driving conditions. OTOH, we had about 18 inches of snow yesterday, and the schools were closed. One of my kids stayed home from school today after waiting over half an hour for a bus in -7 F weather. I had her soak her feet in the bathtub, and the bus came by during that time. No way was I going to drive her. Winter in Wisconsin is NOT for wimps. The weather in Milwaukee is milder than the rest of the state. I think Milwaukee had about 8 inches yesterday. Sometimes folks from Milwaukee misjudge the weather conditions in the rest of the state. In one case, if they don't show up it may be another continuance, although I will try for a dismissal. I may or may not be able to avoid SJ, at least I could delay. If I avoid SJ, I will have at least a few more months before trial. In the other case, I will move for dismissal right before the hearing, and if they don't show up, that could be very dangerous for them. These are mortgage forclosure cases, so the stakes are VERY high. Edited December 10, 2009 by BrokeBob corrected ambiguity, I hope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikkivs Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 From reading your previous posts, I think you mean foreclosure cases for your rental properties right? Whatever your cases are, I wish you the best of luck. I never realized how harsh the winters are in your home state. That is amazing! And here I am complaining about the 28 degree weather last night;) I guess everything is relative.Hope all of you have a wonderful day:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merrybucks Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 As soon as the lawyer calls them as a witness do I just say "I object your honor"? Then tell the judge that the witness has no personal knowledge etc. I would ask about their work history, if they have ever been employed by the OC, what are the accounting practices of the OC and their experience with them. The idea is to demostrate to the court the they are not quailified to testify to the accuracy of the account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I would ask about their work history, if they have ever been employed by the OC, what are the accounting practices of the OC and their experience with them. The idea is to demostrate to the court the they are not quailified to testify to the accuracy of the account.Yep, that's exactly what you should ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonegalag Posted January 1, 2010 Report Share Posted January 1, 2010 this is a very helpful post. are there any other hints for objecting? what about when a lawyer tries to admit hearsay or something? do i just interrupt or wait until she finishes to "object" on my grounds (that it is hearsay, etc)?thanks.s.g Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFS Posted January 1, 2010 Report Share Posted January 1, 2010 when you realize an Objection is needed. You don't want the judge or jury to be tainted by anything not admissible. One important point for pro se - you can not appeal unless you have made your record. If you don't object to something you cant appeal on that point. Depending on the objection, I would object immediately when needed, if the judge denies it, I would say "for the record I object because . . . " and then at the end I would summarized any objections the judge overruled. Now you have made your record. In an appeal, the appeal court must see that if the judge made an error, you gave the judge plenty of opportunities to correct the error.It is intimidating, but you MUST do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonegalag Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 thanks so much for the reply. i was curious about the record, but i want to make sure i was being "civil"..for lack of a better word. my court system stresses politeness and order, and i didn't want to seem overbearing and too inexperienced.thanks again!!s.g. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFS Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 But you must not let the other side introduce evidence (or say things) they have no right to introduce or say. Attorney's do it all the time, I almost think they make a game of it for a pro se - let's see what I can get in front of the judge! Good Luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonegalag Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 wow. i didn't know they would try to be that slick, lol. i just thought the lawyer would try to make me look stupid and guilty. i will be on the lookout for that, and object to hearsay, improper evidence, etc. i appreciate your input.this process is still kinda scary, but it makes a person feel more empowered when she knows what might be coming.thanks again.s.g. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MG05 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) My advice and I am sure any legal professional will tell you almost the same thing ...1. Stays on point ... don’t drift ... lawyers will run with it if you give them an opening! 2. No such thing as a definite … and don’t say maybe, could have, estimate or approximate … either you know the answer or you don’t know. 3. Answer yes or no ... answer only what they ask ... if you don't understand make them repeat the answer until you are certain what is being asked ... 4. You will get asked the same question several times all in different ways … be consistent with your answers!5. They will try and rattle you and make cutting statements … smile and take it in stride … remember you’re Pro Se and you get to cross examine their witness. 6. Take notes if you can … easier to stay on point.7. Don’t' clarify or try and explain answers or what you think they meant ... let them make the inference... Edited January 2, 2010 by MG05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFS Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Go one step further, always repeat their question - and if you are not sure how to answer their question - repeat it in such a way you can answer. This takes some practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts