Legal Definitions - cross-question

Cross-question, often referred to as cross-examination, is a fundamental process in legal proceedings where a lawyer questions a witness who was initially called to testify by the opposing side. The primary purpose of cross-questioning is typically to test the credibility, accuracy, and completeness of the witness's testimony, challenge their statements, or elicit information that supports the cross-examining party's own case. It is distinct from direct examination, where a lawyer questions a witness they themselves have called to testify.

• Example 1: Challenging an Alibi Witness in a Criminal Trial

  In a criminal trial for theft, the defense attorney calls a witness who testifies that they saw the defendant at a charity event across town at the exact time the theft occurred. When it's the prosecutor's turn, they begin to cross-question this alibi witness. The prosecutor might ask detailed questions about the witness's eyesight, the lighting conditions at the event, how well they know the defendant, and any potential reasons they might have to provide false testimony, aiming to cast doubt on the reliability of their alibi.

  This illustrates cross-questioning because the prosecutor is questioning a witness who was presented by the opposing side (the defense) with the goal of undermining the credibility and accuracy of their testimony.

• Example 2: Discrediting an Expert Witness in a Civil Lawsuit

  During a civil lawsuit concerning a construction defect, the plaintiff's attorney calls an engineering expert who testifies that the defendant's faulty design directly caused significant structural damage. After the plaintiff's attorney finishes, the defendant's attorney begins to cross-question the expert. They might ask about the expert's qualifications, the specific methodologies used for their analysis, whether they considered alternative causes for the damage, or if they have a financial incentive to testify for the plaintiff, all in an effort to weaken the impact of the expert's opinion.

  This demonstrates cross-questioning as the defendant's attorney is questioning an expert witness called by the opposing party (the plaintiff) to challenge the validity of their conclusions and potentially reduce their influence on the court.

• Example 3: Eliciting Favorable Information in a Deposition

  In a pre-trial deposition for a breach of contract case, an attorney representing Company A is questioning a senior manager from Company B, the opposing party. Company B's attorney has just finished asking their manager questions about the company's general policies. Company A's attorney then begins to cross-question the manager, asking specific, pointed questions about particular emails, meeting minutes, or internal communications that might reveal Company B's failure to uphold its contractual obligations, even if those details were not initially brought up by Company B's own attorney.

  This shows cross-questioning in a deposition context, where an attorney questions a witness associated with the opposing party to gather information, challenge their previous statements, or uncover facts that support their client's position before the case proceeds to trial.