Predicate Question Series #1
This training update is the first in a series that will focus on providing young trial attorneys with a sampling of predicate questions to help them improve their trial technique.
In Minnesota courts, one of the most essential skills for any trial attorney is the ability to lay the proper foundation. This foundation is necessary for the admission of evidence. This skill is crucial for success in trials. Under the Minnesota Rules of Evidence (MRE), attorneys must ensure that evidence is relevant, authentic, and reliable before it can be admitted. Failure to lay the proper foundation can result in the exclusion of critical evidence, potentially weakening your case.
What Does Laying the Proper Foundation Mean in Minnesota?
Laying the foundation in Minnesota courts refers to the process by which an attorney demonstrates to the court that a piece of evidence is admissible. This involves establishing facts that satisfy the court that the evidence is genuine, relevant to the case, and permissible under Minnesota law.
For example, to admit a document, an attorney must establish its authenticity by having a witness with personal knowledge testify that the document is what it purports to be (MRE 901). For other types of evidence, such as expert testimony, the attorney must show that the expert is qualified and that the testimony is based on reliable principles and methods (MRE 702).
Why Is This Skill Essential for Minnesota Trial Attorneys?
- Avoiding the Exclusion of Critical Evidence: In Minnesota, evidence that lacks a proper foundation is subject to exclusion, which can significantly impair a case. For example, a failure to authenticate a crucial document or to establish an expert’s qualifications can result in the court excluding the evidence entirely. Mastering foundational requirements ensures that essential evidence is not lost due to procedural mistakes.
- Navigating Objections Under Minnesota Rules: Proficiency in laying the foundation minimizes the chances of objections by opposing counsel. In Minnesota, objections to foundation can be made under various rules, such as MRE 602 (lack of personal knowledge) or MRE 403 (exclusion of evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time). A strong foundation makes it difficult for opposing counsel to successfully challenge the admissibility of your evidence.
- Increasing Courtroom Efficiency: Judges in Minnesota value efficiency and clear presentation of evidence. Young attorneys who can quickly and effectively lay the foundation for evidence demonstrate professionalism and competence. This not only streamlines the proceedings but also improves your standing in the courtroom.
- Building Credibility with the Judge and Jury: The ability to skillfully lay the foundation enhances the attorney’s credibility before the court. When the judge and jury see that an attorney can efficiently admit evidence, it bolsters their confidence in the attorney’s case. This proficiency can also make the attorney’s argument more persuasive overall.
- Preserving the Record for Appeal: Properly laying the foundation is essential for preserving the record in Minnesota courts. If evidence is excluded and the case is appealed, an appellate court will review the trial record. It will determine whether foundational requirements were met. An attorney who lays the foundation thoroughly can help ensure that any wrongful exclusion of evidence is reversed on appeal.
- Understanding Minnesota-Specific Rules: The Minnesota Rules of Evidence, while similar to the Federal Rules of Evidence, have unique nuances. Attorneys must be familiar with these nuances. For example, MRE 104 allows the court to determine preliminary questions about the admissibility of evidence. Attorneys must be prepared to address these questions with facts and law specific to Minnesota precedent.
Providing Attorneys with a Sampling of Predicate Questions
This training update is the first in a series that will focus on providing young trial attorneys with a sampling of predicate questions that will help them improve their trial technique in three respects.
1. It will assist them in handling the evidence necessary to persuasively present their case to the judge or jury by getting helpful evidence admitted and keeping the harmful out;
2. It will help the less experienced attorneys capture the cadence of a trial, that quality of rhythm that permits an attorney to function smoothly and grammatically, setting the pace for the events unfolding in the courtroom;
3. It will help perfect the record and protect it against the inevitable appeal that follows a vigorous and successful case.
Expertise in trial work comes only through the steady and diligent application of one’s legal skills to the courtroom setting. Experience alone is not enough. One must master both the technique and tactics of trial work. Only after one has mastered techniques can he apply himself to the subtleties of trial tactics. This series on trial predicate questions will, hopefully, help in achieving the mastery of trial advocacy.
In the same light, less experienced attorneys need to understand that these proposed predicate questions are only intended to serve as a starting point for individual trial attorneys. Attorneys should take, modify, or otherwise adapt the suggested foundational questions to conform with their local practice and the specific circumstances of their case.
Most older attorneys, as neophyte trial attorneys, remember when we wished we had access to a repository of predicate questions to draw upon when preparing our foundational questions. Hopefully, this predicate-question training series will serve as a repository for younger trial attorneys and perhaps a convenient refresher for more experienced attorneys.
Note: It should also be noted that all references to he, him, or Mr. should be interpreted to mean he/she, him/her, or Mr./ Ms. This format was adopted to maintain a focus on the content of the questions.
Conclusion
Learning how to properly lay the foundation for evidence under the Minnesota Rules of Evidence is crucial for Minnesota trial attorneys. This knowledge is essential to courtroom success. A strong foundation ensures that key evidence is admitted, helps avoid unnecessary objections, and maintains a clean record for appeal. Mastering this essential skill is vital in becoming a competent, persuasive trial lawyer in Minnesota courts.
NEXT UPDATE: Predicate Question Series #2 will focus on “Introduction of Physical Evidence”
Alan F. Pendleton, Attorney (former district court judge); Pendleton Legal Consulting Services, LLC; Minnesota Judicial Training & Education Blog; afpendleton@gmail.com
MINNESOTA JUDICIAL TRAINING & EDUCATION BLOG 