Which objection applies when counsel is presenting arguments during questioning rather than eliciting facts?

Which objection applies when counsel is presenting arguments during questioning rather than eliciting facts?

• A. Argumentative
• B. Nonresponsive
• C. Narrating
• D. Lack of Foundation

Answer: (A)

In questioning, the focus should be on eliciting facts, not making arguments. An objection to something being said as argumentative is appropriate when the question itself pushes a conclusion or asks the witness to adopt the attorney’s viewpoint rather than simply uncovering what happened. In other words, the attorney is trying to persuade the jury through the question, not by drawing out neutral testimony, and that's what the objection targets. Nonresponsive deals with answers that don’t address the question, narrating covers questions or testimony that tell a story or recount events beyond what was asked, and lack of foundation concerns whether a proper basis for a claim or opinion has been laid. None of those capture the idea of advocacy within the question itself, which is why argumentative is the correct focus here.

In questioning, the focus should be on eliciting facts, not making arguments. An objection to something being said as argumentative is appropriate when the question itself pushes a conclusion or asks the witness to adopt the attorney’s viewpoint rather than simply uncovering what happened. In other words, the attorney is trying to persuade the jury through the question, not by drawing out neutral testimony, and that's what the objection targets.

Nonresponsive deals with answers that don’t address the question, narrating covers questions or testimony that tell a story or recount events beyond what was asked, and lack of foundation concerns whether a proper basis for a claim or opinion has been laid. None of those capture the idea of advocacy within the question itself, which is why argumentative is the correct focus here.