Opinion ID: 1286022
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Abusive Treatment and Unfounded Attacks on LeasCo's Witnesses

Text: The principal issue in most condemnation proceedings is the amount of just compensation for the land taken. Each side generally has its own appraisers testify and seeks to discredit the valuation made by its adversary. That this battle of experts is essentially a swearing match does not give counsel license to asperse the opponent's witnesses on cross-examination. One of LeasCo's appraisers was the target of particular abuse by the board's lawyer. He was belittled (Look, I think it's time we quit the games), accused of lying (Your Honor, the man has been sitting here lying all morning) and sarcastically taunted (I ask you directly, are you ashamed of yourself?    Well, spare me that. Will you spare me that. I heard that before   ). Additionally, the board's lawyer repeatedly suggested that the appraiser's claim of lack of knowledge of certain matters was false: It is indeed convenient for you that you don't know.    You give the impression you want to forget about them if you ever knew about them.    I know, you want to exclude a lot of things.    You predicated a very, very large opinion about a Class A road without knowing what it is. A LeasCo executive was similarly ridiculed and accused of lying when he testified that LeasCo was entitled to $750,000: Q. Your last statement was $750,000? A. Yes. Q. Now, I presume that that needs to be added to some $800,000 testified to by Mr. MacDonald; is that right? A. I do not know what Mr. MacDonald testified to. Q. You seriously want us to believe that; that you don't know what Mr. MacDonald testified to? A. I was not present. Q. That has got to be the most incredible statement that I have ever heard in my life. This witness also was belittled (But you are a witness who has just coughed up the figure of three quarters of a million dollars) and was accused of being dishonest in his responses. [5] Two other expert witnesses testifying for LeasCo were accused of fabricating evidence. Of one, the board's lawyer asserted: He came in here and built a big story on it. With the other, he was more direct: He is testifying falsely again. These comments represent more than the mere reproof of recalcitrant witnesses. They constitute unjustified, direct attacks on the integrity and honesty of LeasCo's witnesses. There is no evidence that these witnesses testified falsely, withheld information when stating that they did not know the answer to counsel's questions, or manufactured false evidence. Witnesses should not be subjected to personal attacks and unsubstantiated insinuations. Each party is entitled to present its case on the merits, free from remarks of opposing counsel which may prejudice the jury and divert its attention from the real issues. [6]