Blog

Ice skating can be a rather dangerous sport where a person may be prone to many injuries. However, just because someone has suffered from an accident while ice skating, that doesn’t mean that it is grounds for a personal injury claim. There are a few circumstances where another person or the owner of an ice skating ring may be held legally responsible for an ice skating accident. Liability for Ice Skating Rink Operators It is the duty of an ice skating operator to keep the ice skating ring safe for patrons. This duty extends towards the general maintenance of the premises and equipment. An operator can be held liable for negligence if they fail to meet these obligations. But consider the dangerous nature of ice skating, an operator is not under a duty to prevent all possible accidents. It is important that the operator take steps to fix or prevent dangerous situations or conditions that they should know or know about. It isn’t enough for them just to post warnings or notices. Apart from failing to identify and amend a risk, an operator might also be held responsible for any injuries caused directly by the negligence of an employee. Liability of Other Skaters If other skaters were responsible for injuring the plaintiff, they might also be held liable under a negligence or intentional tort theory. The defendant has to have intended to cause some kind of harm to the plaintiff for an intentional tort case to succeed. Defenses to Ice Skating Personal Injury Lawsuits A plaintiff might lose a personal injury case under the doctrine of “assumption of the risk,” if the defendant is able to prove that the plaintiff exposed themselves knowingly to the possibility of the injury before it occurred. Anyone that skates is automatically assuming the risk that accompanies the attempt to glide across a frozen, hard surface on thin metal blades. There is a certain amount of falling, slipping, and bumping into other ice skaters that are bound to occur. But this assumption of the risk cannot be applied to every ice skating injury. Having said that, an ice skater does not usually assume that another skater will behave in an unreasonable manner or an operator will fail to take reasonable measures to prevent an injury. The defendant will win the case outright if the assumption of the risk doctrine applies. Comparative or contributory negligence is a similar defense. This means that if a plaintiff’s negligence contributed to the injury, the amount of damages that the defendant owes is reduced or eliminated entirely. For instance, an operator may have negligently permitted a flaw to remain on the ice, but the plaintiff might have been trying to skate far beyond his abilities when the slip and fall occurred. If in a personal injury lawsuit, the operator is found to be 60% responsible and the plaintiff was found to be 40% responsible, the plaintiff will only be awarded 60% of the final damages. Gary Silverstein Gary Silverstein has been a partner of Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolff since 2001, and an associate of the firm since 1989. Mr. Silverstein graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from State University of New York College at Oneonta in 1983. Mr. Silverstein holds a degree of Juris Doctor from the University of Miami School of Law, having graduated in 1988.

A deposition is a question and answer session that takes place before the trial. The answers are given under oath and the deposition usually takes place in the office of an attorney. The judge is not present at a deposition; however, a court reporter or stenographer will be noting down all the questions and their corresponding answers. Video is Paramount At the deposition, you can ask questions to the defendant whom you are suing for causing you harm and injury. The answers provided by the defendant under oath at the deposition are pretrial testimony, and they can be useful during the trial. If the court reporter is taking down all the question and answers, is there a need to videotape the deposition? The answer is yes, since video recording, pretrial testimony will provide certain advantages. First, the video recording will provide a proper record of witnesses who may not come to testify during trail. Some witnesses may not be in town or they may purposely skip town at the time of trial. This does happen sometimes, but it is not a regular occurrence. Hence, if you have videotaped the testimony of such witnesses during deposition, it can be presented during trial as evidence. Health Issues with the Witness Videotaping the deposition is also helpful when the witness is ill, or is not expected to survive up to the time trial begins. In such instance, you would want to videotape the session of deposition, when such witness is answering questions. This way, the testimony of the witness can be preserved. At the time of the trial, the video can be replayed for the jury, so that they can actually see the questions asked and the answers that were given by the witness. There is a huge difference between making the jury see how the witness actually answered the questions on video, compared to a dry reading of what was taken down by the court stenographer. The jury will not be able to grasp fully what took place, when only the transcripts of the questions and answers are read out in court during trial. The jury can understand the questions and answers that are being read out, but there is a lot communicated by mannerisms, tone of voice, and appearance of the witness, which will be missing when the court reporter's transcripts are simply read during trial. On the other hand, when there is a video recording, the jury will be able to see the witness actually testifying and answering the questions. They will know what the witness looked like, how the questions were answered, and how the witness reacted to the questions. Video Brings a Vital Element to the Case The questions and answers recorded at depositions can provide crucial evidence and testimony at the trial, especially when the witness is not available during trial. Even though the court reporter will be taking down the questions and answers, it is much better to videotape the proceedings, since a visual presentation will have much more effect on the jury. Gary Silverstein Gary Silverstein has been a partner of Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolff since 2001, and an associate of the firm since 1989. Mr. Silverstein graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from State University of New York College at Oneonta in 1983. Mr. Silverstein holds a degree of Juris Doctor from the University of Miami School of Law, having graduated in 1988.

During the course of a medical malpractice or accident case trial, several objections are raised by both lawyers. The lawyer raising the objection will have to give a reason for the objection, and the judge will have to make an on the spot decision about it. If the judge feels the objection is appropriate, he will rule, "objection sustained", and if he feels the objections is improper, he will say, "objection overruled". When the objection is sustained by the judge, the witness is not allowed to answer the question, and when the objection is overruled, the witness is instructed to answer the question. The objection could also be about, whether or not certain information can be introduced, so that the jury can see it. "Objection that is privileged" An attorney might stand up and say "Objection judge, that material is privileged". This type of objection usually means, the lawyer is asking the witness questions about a conversation that has gone on between the witness and the attorney. When there is attorney-client privilege, it means the conversation or information exchanged between the client and his attorney, can be prevented from being disclosed to the jury. Attorney-Client Privilege When you hire an attorney, you will be discussing various strategies about what you will be doing during the course of the trial. Now if someone asks what you and your attorney have talked, there will be an objection because those conversations are confidential and privileged. If someone else wants to acquire information about what you and your attorney discussed, then that will not be permitted. When the objection from the other lawyer is due with privilege information, the judge will rule objection sustained, which means the question is not permitted, and the witness does not have to respond to the question. What is permitted under the Law? The law permits an attorney and his client to have confidential conversations and exchange of information. The client has the freedom to speak freely with his lawyer, and tell him whatever he pleases, and no one else can access this information. Such freedom is allowed, so that the lawyer and his client can form strategies in fighting the case and improve their chances of winning at the trial. If things that are discussed between a lawyer and client were made accessible, they can be easily misinterpreted or misrepresented, since they serve the particular purpose of favoring the client. If information exchanged between the lawyer and his client is revealed at a trial, the jury can be easily made prejudiced towards the client. The information could contain strategies of how to make the other party look guilty or about revealing certain information in a manner that is more conducive to the client. All such things can be highly prejudicial, if it is revealed in court. Therefore, the law permits such information to remain confidential, and if the opposing lawyer is trying to invoke this information, the client's attorney can raise the objection of the information being privileged or kept under wraps.

For personal injury or accident cases in New York, there is a jury trial. The jury will usually have six members, and at least five members should unanimously agree to a decision to reach a verdict. Only when five members of the jury are agreeable to a decision, a judgment can be passed. What happens when the jury is not able to decide? Sometimes the members of the jury may not be able to decide, and come to an agreement about a verdict. In such instances, the defense will ask the judge to call it a mistrial, but the plaintiff's lawyer will want the jury to reconsider and come to a verdict. In this situation, the judge will usually call the jurors into his chambers and give them certain instructions. This will usually be a pep talk, where the jurors are encouraged to go back, again deliberate, and come to a decision. The judge will say that it does not matter what the decision is, but a decision should be reached. They will be sent back to continue deliberations, and several hours might go by, as the jury is trying to reach a decision. What is the course of action when the jury is deadlocked? Even after hours of further deliberation, the jury might send a note to the judge saying they are deadlocked. This means, five jurors are unable to come to the same decision, which is required for the verdict. In such instances, the judge will call both the attorneys and ask them how they would like to proceed. The defense attorney will usually want to declare a mistrial, as that is advantageous for their case. The plaintiff's lawyer will not want to declare a mistrial, unless there is something going on, which is highly prejudicial for his client. Only if the lawyer feels there is something prejudicial that could affect his client and the possible outcome, he may agree to a mistrial. In all other instances, the plaintiff's lawyer, will recommend that the judge again talk to the jury, and encourage them to deliberate further and come to a decision. There are marvelous chances the judge might again instruct the jury to deliberate further, because the judge will not want a mistrial. However, even after repeated attempts, the jury is still deadlocked; the judge will have to declare it a mistrial. The Effects of a Mistrial If it were declared a mistrial, the entire course of the trial that has taken place would be a complete waste. It does not matter how long the trial has gone on, whether it is days, weeks, or months, the entire trial will be thrown out in a mistrial, and no judge would want that to happen. All the money and resources that have gone into the trial, of the court, and both the parties, would be a waste. Whatever was put in for trying this case is now for nothing. When a mistrial is declared, the whole case has to be tried again from the start, and a new jury will be selected.

If you are injured in an accident and you feel a particular person is responsible for causing the accident and your resultant injuries, then you can initiate a lawsuit to claim damages. In New York when you are initiating a lawsuit against somebody, your attorney will have to prepare certain documents called a summons and complaint. These are two separate documents that are served and delivered to the person or people whom you are suing. The procedure is termed as serving a summons. What is a Summons and a Complaint? A summons is a notice, which informs the person being sued that he has a certain time limit within which to respond to the accompanying complaint. The complaint on the other hand is a document that lists various allegations. However, these allegations are generalized and not specific. The complaints document will discuss points such as claims of negligence, claims of medical malpractice, or claims of wrongful death. These allegations have to be worded in specific legal language. The document is meant for getting a response, to see, if the person whom you are suing is agreeing with the allegation or not. Filing the Lawsuit and Securing the Index Number The summons and complaint are important documents when you want to start a lawsuit against somebody. In New York, the only way to start a lawsuit is to take the summons and the complaint, go to the courthouse, and purchase what is called an index number. This index number is an identification number that is attached to your complaint. Once that document has been filed, and you have purchased the index number, you have officially started a lawsuit. The next step involves, delivering the documents to the people or person whom you are suing. Who can Serve a Summons and a Complaint and How is it Done The summons and the complaint can be served by anybody who is over 18 years old and is not a party to the action. The copy of the summons and complaint can be hand delivered to the party being sued, and the one who serves the documents should file an affidavit of doing this service in the court within 14 days. If the person being sued is not available at home or place of work, the summons and complaint document can be left with someone who is willing to accept it on the person's behalf. However, a copy should also be mailed to the person being sued within 20 days of serving the substituted person. In certain instances, the person might be trying to avoid being served the summons, and if after at least three attempts the person is still not available, then summons and complaint can be served by what is called "Nail and mail". In this type of delivery, the summons and complaint documents will be stuck to the door of the residence or place of work of the person being sued.

What is a Bill of Particulars? If you are injured in an accident and you want to claim damages, you will most probably have to file a lawsuit in New York. Once the accident case starts, your attorney needs to provide the defense with a detailed itemized list of what your claims are and what injuries you have suffered due to the accident. This is called Bill of particulars, and additionally, your lawyer will have to itemize all your medical expenses, and special damages. This list will show how much you had to spend on medicine for treating your injuries, and how much income you have lost. All this information has to be provided so that the defense has full understanding of your claims. How is a Bill of Particulars Prepared? For preparing the Bill of Particulars, your attorney will have to gather all your medical records. Once the lawsuit has begun, your attorney will review your case and have all the information about the allegations, all the information about your medical bills, and the costs you have incurred for treating your injuries. Medical expenses will be divided in two based on what you had to pay out of your pocket and the amount your insurance has paid. Your attorney will have to identify what injuries you have suffered because of the accident or wrongdoing. He will also gather information about your lost wages, since you could not attend work due to your injuries. The defense will put forth a demand for Bill of particulars, which will contain all the questions they want answered. Your lawyer will go through each of these questions in detail and provide the required answers. Issues with an Incomplete Bill of Particulars There will be instances where the defense might say that your lawyer has not answered certain question/s with enough specificity, or that certain questions were ignored altogether. Based on this, the defense can therefore claim that they do not exactly know what the medical bills are, or what the claims are. In such instances, your attorney will have to supplement the first list with the additional required information. If your lawyer fails to list sufficient information in detail, then proving your claims can become difficult at the time of trial. The defense can object saying that the plaintiff (you) did not inform us about a particular theory that is being brought up against us. Since the defense does not have sufficient notice about the particular theory, which could be negligence or malpractice, they will be unprepared to address the issue. The defense will therefore claim that the plaintiff should not be allowed to bring claims addressing that particular theory. The Importance of a Bill of Particulars Therefore, a Bill of Particulars should have all the information asked by the defense, and should list in detail the nature of your injuries, medical costs, and lost income. If it is incomplete and some theory is left out, then you may not be able to claim damages based on that theory during the trial.

In New York, a car accident case is tried in two parts. The first part of the case will be to find out who is legally responsible for causing the automobile accident. When you obtain a verdict in your favor for the first part, it means the party you have sued is indeed responsible for the accident. The second part of the trial is about determining damages. Once the liability is determined in the first part, the jury will now determine how much compensation should be awarded to you, for the stress and losses that you have suffered due to your injuries. A Settlement is Possible at any Stage of the Case In your car accident case in New York, when you have a verdict in your favor on liability, then is it possible to settle the case, before the damages are tried? Once the jury has determined that, the defendant is responsible for the accident or liability verdict is declared, and they are about to try the case on damages, is it possible to settle the case. The answer is yes. It is in fact possible to settle an accident case, at any stage during the trial. This includes from the time the case is started, all the way through the different stages, and even when the jury is deliberating to pass a verdict. Yes, you can even try to settle your case, when the jury is out deliberating and before the verdict is read. A Settlement is Possible even after the Jury Verdict, when the Defense Appeals When the jury comes back with a verdict and the verdict is in your favor, the defense might declare that they are going to appeal. This means they are going to drag the case for another year or two. There is still the possibility of settling the case, after the jury verdict, if you want to avoid the appeal process. The Settlement Amount will Vary Even though a settlement is possible at any stage during an accident case, and even after when the defense is appealing, your lawyer should know when it is the best time to settle. After the first part of the case is over, and jury has reached a verdict in your favor about liability, then the defense might be eager to settle because they do not know how much damage the jury might award in the second part of the case. If the defense feels, the jury is likely to award a huge amount, then they will be eager to settle. Now, the question would be, whether you should accept the settlement or wait for the jury verdict. It will mainly depend on what your lawyer thinks is the value of the case, and how far you can depend on the jury to award a heft amount as damages. Either way, there is not any guarantee you are going to receive the best possible settlement, and it will mainly depend on the knowledge and experience of your attorney in estimating the best deal.

Many a times during trial, the opposition may take objection to the prosecuting attorney's line of questioning or presentation. The judge has only a few minutes to decide whether or not he wants to allow the objection or overrule it. Now, before the Judge gives his decision, the defense lawyer can ask to have a 'side-bar' with the Judge and deliberate a little more on the objection being raised. A side-bar is a private area in the courtroom near the Judge's bench where the attorneys and the Judge can have discussions and hear legal arguments. This usually is referred to as asking for a side-bar. You must have seen it in movies―judges and lawyers having heated arguments away from prying ears and eyes. But have you ever wondered why this little tete-a-tete is important in a legal proceeding? Why a Side-Bar is Necessary During the course of a trial, there are many issues that cannot be publicly talked about in front of an empanelled jury. If the defense feels strongly about a certain topic that the prosecuting attorney is hell bent on bringing up in court, the defense can ask for a private discussion with the judge to shed light on their reasons for keeping this particular topic away from the jury. The judge can of course ask the court reporter to strike a particularly offensive statement or piece of evidence, and the jury would obviously be instructed to not let what they have heard or seen affect their line of reasoning. But it seldom works this way. The jury members too are human after all, and what they see or hear in court obviously has an impact on their final decision. This is why a side-bar is so important. The lawyers can argue on legal issues and taboo topics without involving the jury members and thus be at ease discussing their objections and counterarguments without worrying about how it will all affect the outcome of the trial. Certain Discussions do not Pertain to the Jury In a trial, the judge is the 'ruler of law' while the jury works as the 'finders of fact'. They do not have anything to do with the legal issues and involving them in legal arguments will only cause more harm than good. So whenever the presiding judge or any of the attorneys feel like they need to hammer out a sore topic in private, they can ask for a side-bar meeting without confounding or including the jury members. The legal arguments that the judge and the lawyers enter into are then not recorded as part of the official transcript of the trial and the topics that the defense, or the prosecution, wants to keep away from the jury's ears can be successfully kept under wraps. Who else can use a Side-Bar It is not only the lawyers or the judge who can call for a side-bar. Court appointed interpreters can also ask for a side-bar when they feel that their might be a mistrial in the offing due to certain procedural mistakes or because the interpreter is not being allowed to do their work properly. A side-bar can also be used by other members of the court to bring to the judge's attention important matters on which a legal ruling may be necessary.

A 20 year old case of a pizza delivery man who was killed in Long Beach, California has come to a close. But it is not the verdict that everyone was waiting for. The case has been closed as the judge declared a mistrial on Thursday, since crucial evidence related to the case did not come to light until late Monday; just days before the announcement on Thursday. This is a brilliant example of how procedural errors in a lawsuit can result in a mistrial and pour all the hardwork put in the by the attorneys and the client down the drain. A procedural error is one way to cause a mistrial. Another very easy way of getting your case thrown out of court is to attempt to make contact with the jurors. We have all seen the movies where the 12 empanelled jury members are made to stay in sequestration. John Grisham's novel "Runaway Jury" has a plot based on jury sequestration. But this is not just the stuff of movies or fantastical books―in reality too, the jurors are supposed to stay away from the attorneys and the clients whose trial they are judging. This is done in order to ensure that no one can unduly influence the jury and manipulate the outcome of jury decisions. So, even a small hello can be cause for concern? Yes, that is so. Take the court in Nassau County, Long Island, for example. There is a cafeteria in the basement of the court where it is common to find jurors, and attorneys and their clients having lunch together. Of course they can all go out to lunch separately but sometimes, it is easier to just go down to the basement and have a quick bite. A Clear Separation Even in this seemingly casual atmosphere, there is a distinct line drawn between the jurors and the others. Attorneys do not talk to the jurors except outside the courtroom when are in a voir dire, or presenting the facts of the case. And if you think that this rule applies only to lawyers, think again. The law forbids the plaintiffs and defendants from talking to the jurors as well. Even a simple 'Hello' can cause the opposing party's lawyer to ask for a mistrial. And in most cases, the Judge will grant his wish and throw your case out the window. And that's the right way to avoid a mistrial! No Crossing this Line There are specific reasons why the jury is shielded from any external influence – it ensures a fair trial. Attorneys follow this rule to the T (or they risk losing a winning case), but as a party in the trial you need to know that you too have certain responsibilities, failing which you can cause your own case to be to thrown out the window. In the eyes of the law, ignorance is not always akin to innocence. So, think carefully the next time you see a juror sauntering down the corridor. Ignore that impulse to say a cheery hello - it is only for the best!

After the defense has presented all of its witnesses in a trial, it is up to the prosecution to decide whether or not they would like to call in rebuttal witnesses. The use of rebuttal witnesses rests on the discretion of the trial judge. And though they can be useful in punching holes in the defendant's theory of the case, a rebuttal witness is not a chance for the prosecution to present its entire case again. The use of rebuttal witnesses is mainly done in order to contradict or refute evidence that the defense has offered to the court during its presentation. Why go for a Rebuttal? During the course of the trial, there will be times when the prosecution is stopped from presenting evidence or discussing key issues. The prosecution's experts too may be prevented from talking about these aspects of the trial. Now, during the defense's presentation they too are required to put experts on the stand who would provide evidence to support the defense's theory of the case. Let's say that the defense's experts end up talking about the same issues and trial aspects that the prosecution was disallowed to discuss earlier on. The prosecution can then ask the trial judge for permission to bring in rebuttal witnesses to contradict the arguments presented by the defense. And since it is the defense lawyers who themselves have brokered conversation on the taboo topics, the judge in all probability will allow the prosecution to bring in their experts for a rebuttal. A Prosecution’s Response The integral aspect to note here is that the use of rebuttal witnesses depends entirely on the foundation laid by the defense. Also, unless the defense has presented any evidence which the prosecution's rebuttal witnesses can contradict and prove to be untrue, there is no point in asking for a rebuttal session. For instance, if the defense presents evidence about the defendant's alibi, the prosecution may call a rebuttal witness to contradict or refute this evidence. Like the other aspects of the trail, the rebuttal session too is dependent on the defense's theory of the case. A trial judge will grant the prosecution permission to call in rebuttal witnesses only after deciding that the defense's presentation leaves room for contradictions. Keep it Short and Aim for the Kill A rebuttal session is generally very quick, so it is important to focus only on the most important aspects of the trial. Defense lawyers are generally very eager to ensure that no new topics are introduced during the rebuttal session. Once the prosecution has presented their contrary evidence in the rebuttal session, the defense is allowed to cross examine the witness and they can even ask for a surrebuttal to disprove the rebuttal witness' evidence. But in practice, this very rarely happens. A rebuttal witness is a card that experienced attorneys play only to win and not every case needs a rebuttal for victory. So, do not worry if your attorney does not plan for a rebuttal, but in case he does, make sure that the rebuttal session discredits the defense's theory completely and ensures your victory. Robert Wolff Robert H. Wolff is a member and partner of the prestigious New York City Personal Injury Law Firm of Rosenberg Minc, Falkoff, & Wolff, LLP. Mr. Wolff graduated from SUNY Albany, cum laude, in 1978 with a B.A. in Psychology and American History. Thereafter, he attended St. John’s University School of Law, where he was a member of the Moot Court Team and the Criminal Law Society, graduating in 1981 with a Juris Doctor’s degree.

If you suspect that you have been a victim of personal injury in New York, you need to understand the trial process better apart from consulting with a personal injury attorney. For instance, during a trial, the defense attorney can object to a question raised by your lawyer saying that a proper foundation has not been laid. Right to Object to Questions During a trial, lawyers on both sides have the right to object to questions asked by the other. They also have to provide a reason for their objection and the judge will then either sustain the objection or overrule it. However, the lawyer should take care to ensure that the objections are not too frequent as the jury might otherwise suspect them of trying to prevent facts from being placed in the open. No Foundation Rule Sometimes the defense lawyer will object to a question saying that no proper foundation has been laid. This means that the defense lawyer is saying that there is no clear information about why the question is being asked. For instance, if your medical malpractice lawyer asked the doctor if they had operated on the wrong side of the patient’s brain as the first question, it could be considered as lacking in foundation. In that case, you lawyer will have to ask a series of questions to obtain the same information. These could include questions such as whether you were a patient of the doctor, how long had they been treating you, what was the medical procedure suggested, who performed the medical procedure, and what exactly was done during it. This series of questions and the answers will help establish facts such as that you were a patient of the doctor concerned, that a medical procedure or surgery was suggested, that the doctor wanted to remove a tumor on the right side of the brain, that the doctor performed the surgery, that the doctor removed a portion of the left side of the brain instead of the tumor on the right, and that this was medically wrong. Rationale for the Rule The objection based on no foundation or no proper foundation helps ensure that the jury has a clear picture of the events leading to the medical malpractice. In order to prove medical malpractice, your lawyer has to prove that a patient doctor relationship existed, that medical negligence occurred, and that the patient suffered because of this. The series of questions will help establish all of these facts or similar chains of evidence. The witness, in this case, the doctor accused of medical malpractice, will have to answer only those questions for which the judge overrules the objection. A trial attorney will develop a sense of which questions can be asked directly and for which a foundation has to be laid. If you have questions regarding medical malpractice or personal injury cases in New York, you are welcome to call us. Your situation will be taken serious and our firm has been around the block before.

If you have suffered an adverse reaction as a result of medical malpractice or sustained a personal injury in New York, you are entitled to claim compensation. However, this is not a simple procedure because the doctor who committed the error, the person responsible for the personal injury, or their insurance company is likely to dispute the claim and either refuses to make the payment or try and reduce the compensation they offer. Options before the Affected Party If you have been affected by medical malpractice or sustained a physical injury you need to consult with a New York medical malpractice and personal injury lawyer before you file your claim for compensation. If the insurance company disputes your claim, your lawyer will then use the information already collected to file a case in court. Examining Witnesses When the court hears the case, your lawyer will put witnesses such as medical experts and others on the stand and ask them questions that help the jury understand the events and circumstances of the case. These questions are of two types – preliminary and main. Preliminary Questions The preliminary questions asked by your lawyer will help establish the credentials of the witness. For instance, the lawyer will ask if the medical expert went to a particular medical school, completed their residency at a particular hospital, and whether they are board certified. Most of these questions are leading, meaning that the witness just has to answer either yes or no. Most defense attorneys will not object to leading questions at this phase as they help to quickly establish the credentials of the witness. Main Questions However, when your lawyer moves on to the specifics of the case, the questions are expected to be open ended. This means that the lawyer will ask the witness what medical reports they examined, what conclusions they drew from them, and so on. The witness will they describe their actions and findings. However, if your lawyer asks leading questions at this stage of the proceedings, the defense lawyer can object. This is because the jury will have to make up their minds about the credibility of the testimony of the expert witness as an independent person presenting their views. Essentially, your lawyer begins by questioning the witness with leading questions, but later on turns the process around and expects the witness to describe their findings and views in their own words. Objections If the defense lawyer raises objections about the leading questions, the judge can either sustain the objections, in which case the witness is prohibited from answering the question, or overrule the objections, in which case the witness is obliged to answer the question. When presenting testimony from an expert witness, your lawyer should be using open ended questions that help the jury assess the credibility of the witness. If you have any questions regarding medical malpractice or personal injury cases, a competent law firm specializing in these practices.