NON-RESPONSIVE (N)
FRE 611
A witness’s answers that put forth information not required by the attorney’s questions are objectionable as non-responsive. Any question that extends beyond the specific information sought by the question is objectionable, and when a non-responsive answer injects highly prejudicial information, a mistrial may be necessary. This objection is ONLY available for a witness’s answer.
Examples
- “I really don’t want to talk about that. I’d rather discuss what should happen to the man who murdered the President.”
- “Not to my knowledge. All I know is that Mr. Parker is an alcoholic lush.”
- “Look, that’s not really relevant. What is relevant is that the defendant is a sick animal that needs to be put down.”
FRE 611. Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses and Presenting Evidence
(a) Control by the Court; Purposes. The court should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to:
(1) make those procedures effective for determining the truth;
(2) avoid wasting time; and
(3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
(b) Scope of Cross-Examination. Cross-examination should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the witness's credibility. The court may allow inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.
(c) Leading Questions. Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except as necessary to develop the witness's testimony. Ordinarily, the court should allow leading questions:
(1) on cross-examination; and
(2) when a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party.
Summary
Rule 611 deals generally with the scope of a trial judge's authority to exercise reasonable control over the trial proceedings, including the mode of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence. The rule contemplates flexibility and discretion so that the truth will be ascertained and the interests of the public and the parties promoted. In short, the three main objectives of Rule 611 are to discover the truth in an efficient manner, avoid wasting time, and protect the witnesses from improper examination questions.
Possible Objections under Rule 611: Argumentative, Compound, Narrative, Leading, Mischaracterization, Nonresponsive, Asked & Answered, Vague, Facts not in Evidence
Case Law (Non-Responsive)
- U.S. v. Rivera, 61 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 1995) (non-responsive answers stating that defendant previously was in prison combined with incriminating hearsay information warranted mistrial)
- Silbergleit v. First Interstate Bank of Fargo, N.A., 37 F.3d 394 (8th Cir. 1994) (non-responsive references to plaintiff as rich, Jewish, and receiving unemployment compensation were designed to impassion and prejudice jury; mistrial)