GREGORY CHANDLER ON CONTINUING OBJECTIONS

Continuing objections are a vexing problem.  I was reviewing a trial record last week in which the trial counsel had made an excellent use of a continuing objection.

Often, a particular line of testimony or other evidence will present the same evidentiary objection that the nonoffering party has previously and unsuccessfully argued to the Court.  In these circumstances, neither the Court nor trial counsel may find it productive to reiterate continuous objections at each point during the trial as if the issue had not been raised before. 

On the other hand, trial counsel must be concerned that a failure to renew an objection down the line could be deemed a waiver.  Therefore, trial counsel should make clear that he or she has a continuing objection, on grounds previously stated, to the entire line of testimony or evidence.  In federal courts, nothing in the Federal Rule of Evidence prevents the use of a continuing objection, and the procedure has been upheld by many Courts.  Of course, a continuing objection is only as good as the original objection; as such, it only preserves the ground of appellate review initially stated by the trial counsel. 

Gregory Chandler, Attorney at Law