Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Opposite of ferae naturae (below) donatio mortis causa: deathbed gift Gift causa mortis; "The donor, contemplating imminent death, declares words of present gifting and delivers the gift to the donee or someone who clearly takes possession on behalf of the donee. The gift becomes effective at death but remains revocable until that time."
Frequently, the most desired witness (the deponent) is an opposite party to the action. In that instance, legal notice may be given to that person's attorney, and a subpoena is not required. However, if the witness is not a party to the lawsuit (a third party) or is reluctant to testify, then a subpoena must be served on that party. [13]
[18] Judge Posner argued that because witnesses "are prone to fudge, to fumble, to misspeak, to misstate, to exaggerate", few trials would reach a judgment if "any such pratfall warranted disbelieving a witness's entire testimony." [19] Additionally, evidence scholar John Henry Wigmore was an outspoken critic of the doctrine. [20]
Leading questions are also permitted on cross-examination, as witnesses called by the opposing party are presumed hostile. Misstates evidence / misquotes witness / improper characterization of evidence: this objection is often overruled, but can be used to signal a problem to witness, judge and jury. [7]
In New South Wales, a court may set aside the whole, or part, of a subpoena on the basis that it is a "fishing expedition".In Lowery v Insurance Australia Ltd, the NSW Court of Appeal held that where documents requested in the schedule of a subpoena are deemed to have no relevance to the proceedings in dispute, the subpoena may be set aside as it has no legitimate forensic purpose.
In law, cross-examination is the interrogation of a witness by one's opponent. It is preceded by direct examination (known as examination-in-chief in Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, South Africa, India and Pakistan) and may be followed by a redirect (known as re-examination in the aforementioned countries).
In-camera is the opposite of trial in open court where all parties and witnesses testify in a public courtroom, and attorneys publicly present their arguments to the trier of fact. In camera hearings during trials
Even neutral questions can lead witnesses to answers based on word choice, response framing, assumptions made, and form. The words "fast", "collision" and "How", for example, can alter speed estimates provided by respondents. [7] When someone asks a leading question, they expect the other person to agree with the leading question.