Question Set 7: Mortgage - Redemption

Answer Sheet

Objection Key A - Argumentative L - Leading

B - Best Evidence M - Multiple

C - Conclusion P - Privileged

F - Facts Assumed R - Repetitive

H - Hearsay S - Speculative

I - Irrelevant V- Vague

Q - Proper

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

1 11 2 12 3 13 4 14 5 15 6 16 7 17 8 18 9 19 10 20

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

1 11 2 12 3 13 4 14 5 15 6 16 7 17 8 18 9 19 10 20

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

Your Answers

CorrectAnswers

1 11 2 12 3 13 4 14 5 15 6 16 7 17 8 18 9 19 10 20

Question Set #7 Question Set #13 Question Set #23

Instructions (1)

• Read the Plaintiff's questions as they appear on the Common Screen.

• You should have a hard copy of the score sheet pictured in the slide immediately previous to this one.

• Using the Objection Key on the upper right-hand corner of your score sheet, input your objection in the appropriately numbered slot (Remember: “Q” = No objection). Objections should be based off of the last line of dialogue on each Question Slide.

Instructions (2)

• Your score is the number of questions you properly objected to.

• Input only letters contained within the Objection Key. • After all question slides have been presented we will

collectively go over the correct objection to each question. We will provide you with an answer key with blank space for notes.

Instructions (3)

Now pay attention and make the right objections!

Fact Pattern:

Loaners, Inc. (“Loaners”) holds a mortgage on a residential piece of real estate granted to them by your client. Loaners is attempting to foreclose on your client as well as evict her from the premises. Loaners argues that your client is in default and now refuses to vacate the premises. Your client argues that while she was in fact in default at one point she has since tried to exercise her right of redemption and satisfy all outstanding moneys on the mortgage including the balance and all associated fees. Loaners contends however that no such action was taken by your client. Your time at trial commences as Loaners (the Plaintiff) calls its first witness.

Question 1

Plaintiff: Hello sir, could you please state and spell your name for the record?

(Any Objections?)

Question 2

Witness: Sure, Mark Andrew Nelson, N-e-l-s-o-n.

Plaintiff: Now you think this is one giant waste of Loaners time don’t you?

(Any Objections?)

Question 3

Plaintiff: What is it that you do for a living?

(Any Objections?)

Question 4

Witness: I am head of client communications at Loaners.

Plaintiff: Have you had conversations with the Defendant? If so how many? Out of those conversations how many were about her redemption attempts?

(Any Objections?)

Question 5

Plaintiff: What is it that you do at Loaners as head of client communications?

(Any Objections?)

Question 6

Witness: I basically supervise all employees that regularly answer clients’ various questions as well as personally handle some of the more technical questions.

Plaintiff: Have you ever had a conversation with the Defendant?

(Any Objections?)

Question 7

Witness: Yeah, multiple times actually.

Plaintiff: Did you enjoy those conversations?

(Any Objections?)

Question 8

Plaintiff: How many conversations did you have with the Defendant over the past two years?

(Any Objections?)

Question 9

Witness: I’d say about twelve or so.

Plaintiff: Were any of them about her right of redemption?

(Any Objections?)

Question 10

Witness: Yes.

Plaintiff: Those were all post eviction order though?

(Any Objections?)

Question 11

Plaintiff: When was the first time you had a conversation with the Defendant about her right of redemption?

(Any Objections?)

Question 12

Witness: A week after the eviction order was filed.

Plaintiff: Did the sheriff’s office mention to Loaners anything the Defendant said about her trying to have exercised her right of redemption as they were serving her with the order?

(Any Objections?)

Question 13

Plaintiff: What does the Defendant's mortgage agreement with Loaners say about her right of redemption? (Defendant’s mortgage agreement has not bee offered into evidence)

(Any Objections?)

Question 14

Plaintiff: During the first conversation you had with the Defendant about her right of redemption, what was she saying?

(Any Objections?)

Question 15

Witness: She was saying that she couldn’t believe we were trying to evict her and that there was no way she was going to get out because she had offered to redeem her mortgage and we had refused to allow her to do so.

Plaintiff: So the Defendant said that she was not going to move out because she had tried to redeem her mortgage but Loaners had refused to allow her to do so?

(Any Objections?)

Question 16

Witness: That’s correct.

Plaintiff: To your knowledge, in the time you have worked for Loaners, has Loaners ever refused to allow a client to properly redeem their mortgage?

(Any Objections?)

Question 17

Witness: No. Now granted people do not typically look to redeem their mortgage very often – especially not in this economy - but no, the few times it’s happened since I’ve worked for Loaners, Loaners has never refused them that right.

Plaintiff: So Loaners is a good company?

(Any Objections?)

Question 18

Plaintiff: Did the Defendant have further communication with you after that initial call following the eviction order?

(Any Objections?)

Question 19

Witness: Yes, several more.

Plaintiff: And…?

(Any Objections?)

Question 20

Plaintiff: Did the Defendant consistently argue something each time she spoke with you?

(Any Objections?)

END

Witness: Yes. She kept saying that she had tried to redeem and that she would never move out of her house and that she would fight this thing all the way.

Plaintiff: Thank you. No further question at this time your honor.

Answer Explanations

Question 1

Plaintiff: Hello sir, could you please state and spell your name for the record?

Proper: While technically hearsay, issues such as identity and occupation are considered preliminary matters and are therefore not subject to the rules of evidence.

See FEC 90.105FLSTAT

Question 2

Witness: Sure, Mark Andrew Nelson, N-e-l-s-o-n.

Plaintiff: Now you think this is one giant waste of Loaners time don’t you?

Leading & Irrelevant: Leading questions are those designed to elicit a desired response. In general leading questions are not to be used during the direct examination of a witness. Here, Plaintiff’s attorney was trying to get the witness to say that he felt the case was a waste of time. Furthermore, such a question is irrelevant as it does not tend to prove or disprove a material fact See FEC 90.612 & FEC 90.401 FLSTAT FLSTAT

Question 3

Plaintiff: What is it that you do for a living?

Proper: While technically hearsay, issues such as identity and occupation are considered preliminary matters and are therefore not subject to the rules of evidence.

See FEC 90.105 FLSTAT

Question 4

Witness: I am head of client communications at Loaners.

Plaintiff: Have you had conversations with the Defendant? If so how many? Out of those conversations how many were about her redemption attempts?

Multiple: This question is worded in such a manner that should the witness attempt to provide an answer; it would likely serve only to confuse the jury.

See FEC 90.403 FLSTAT

Question 5

Plaintiff: What is it that you do at Loaners as head of client communications?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 6

Witness: I basically supervise all employees that regularly answer client’s various questions as well as personally handle some of the more technical questions.

Plaintiff: Have you ever had a conversation with the Defendant?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 7

Witness: Yeah, multiple times actually.

Plaintiff: Did you enjoy those conversations?

Irrelevant: Such a question is irrelevant as it does not tend to prove or disprove a material fact.

See FEC 90.401 FLSTAT

Question 8

Plaintiff: How many conversations did you have with the Defendant over the past two years?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 9

Witness: I’d say about twelve or so.

Plaintiff: Were any of them about her right of redemption?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 10

Witness: Yes.

Plaintiff: Those were all post eviction order though?

Leading: Leading questions are those designed to elicit a desired response. In general leading questions are not to be used during the direct examination of a witness.

See FEC 90.612FLSTAT

Question 11

Plaintiff: When was the first time you had a conversation with the Defendant about her right of redemption?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 12Witness: A week after the eviction order was filed.

Plaintiff: Did the sheriff’s office mention to Loaners anything the Defendant said about her trying to have exercised her right to redemption as they were serving her with the order?

Hearsay: Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Here, a response to the question would almost certainly constitute hearsay. See FEC 90.801 FLSTAT

Question 13

Plaintiff: What does the Defendant's mortgage agreement with Loaners say about her right of redemption? (Defendant’s mortgage agreement has not bee offered into evidence)

Best Evidence Rule: Florida’s best evidence rule states that an original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove the contents of the writing, recording, or photograph. Here Loaner’s attorney was attempting to prove the contents of the mortgage agreement without admitting the mortgage agreement itself into evidence. See FEC 90.952 FLSTAT

Question 14Plaintiff: During the first conversation you had with the Defendant about her right of redemption, what was she saying?

Proper/Admission: An admission is said to be any statement made by or adopted by a party. An admission is typically admissible regardless of declarant’s availability to testify.See FEC 90.803.18FLSTAT

Question 15Witness: She was saying that she couldn’t believe we were trying to evict her and that there was no way she was going to get out because she had offered to redeem her mortgage and we had refused to allow her to do so.

Plaintiff: So the Defendant said that she was not going to move out because she had tried to redeem her mortgage but Loaners had refused to allow her to do so?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion. Furthermore, though technically repetitive, such a question would likely be seen as serving to clarify the witness' response.

Question 16

Witness: That’s correct.

Plaintiff: To your knowledge, in the time you have worked for Loaners, has Loaners ever refused to allow a client to properly redeem their mortgage?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 17Witness: No. Now granted people do not typically look to redeem their mortgage very often – especially not in this economy. But no, the few times it’s happened since I’ve worked for Loaners, Loaners has never refused them that right.

Plaintiff: So Loaners is a good company?

Irrelevant & Leading: Such a question is irrelevant as it does not tend to prove or disprove a material fact. Furthermore, leading questions are those designed to elicit a desired response. In general leading questions are not to be used during the direct examination of a witness. Here, Plaintiff’s attorney was trying to get the witness to say that he felt that Loaners was in fact a good company.See FEC 90.401 & 90.612 FLSTAT FLSTAT

Question 18

Plaintiff: Did the Defendant have further communication with you after that initial call following the eviction order?

Proper: Such a question properly inquires about the witness’ perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert opinion.

Question 19

Witness: Yes, several more.

Plaintiff: And…?

Vague: If a question is so broad or indefinite that it is impossible to determine whether or not it answer would be relevant, it may be excluded as it would likely cause confusion or a waste of time. See 90.403 FLSTAT

Question 20

Plaintiff: Did the Defendant consistently argue something each time she spoke with you?

Proper/Admission: An admission is said to be any statement made by or adopted by a party. An admission is typically admissible regardless of declarant’s availability to testify.See FEC 90.803.18FLSTAT

Answer Key – Question Set 71.Q2.L/I3.Q4.M5.Q6.Q7.I8.Q9.Q10.L

11. Q12. H13. B14. Q15. P16. Q17. I/L18. Q19. V20. Q