Question Set 7 Mortgage - Redemption

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

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 90.105
FLSTAT

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?
expert opinion.

Question 9
Witness: I’d say about twelve or so.
Plaintiff: Were any of them about her right of redemption?
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 90.612
FLSTAT

Question 11
Plaintiff: When was the first time you had a conversation with
the Defendant about her right of redemption?
expert opinion.

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 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 14
Plaintiff: 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 90.803.18
FLSTAT

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?
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?
perception, knowledge, personal experience, and/or non-expert
opinion.

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?
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?
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 90.803.18
FLSTAT

Answer Key – Question Set 7
1.Q
2.L/I
3.Q
4.M
5.Q
6.Q
7.I
8.Q
9.Q
10.L
11. Q
12. H
13. B
14. Q
15. P
16. Q
17. I/L
18. Q
19. V
20. Q

Question Set 7 Mortgage - Redemption

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Question Set 7 Mortgage - Redemption

Similar to Question Set 7 Mortgage - Redemption (20)

Question Set 7 Mortgage - Redemption