Yahoo Canada Web Search

Search results

  1. The transcript of an adverse party can be used in four ways: (1) It can be "read in" as evidence at trial (see Rule 31.11(1)). Any read-in of the examination for discovery evidence must be done as part of the party's evidence in chief at trial (i.e. the part of the trial where the party presents its own case).

  2. Neil G Wilson, Madison Santos, 2021 CanLIIDocs 2023

  3. Jul 18, 2024 · Examinations for Discovery allow the parties’ respective lawyers to question the opposing party and discover the opposing side’s case.Apart from trial, the Examination for Discovery is the most important part of a Plaintiff’s lawsuit.The purpose of this article is to provide a general idea of the procedure of a discovery examination, the objectives or purposes of a discovery examination ...

  4. Apr 9, 2018 · The majority of cases settle before trial, but for the few that do proceed to trial, the evidence the opposing party gave at examination for discovery is of critical importance. Rule 31.11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure dictates how evidence from an opposing party’s examination for discovery can be used at trial. There are two ways:

  5. Examination for discovery serves two broad purposes: Understanding the Other Party's Case: Discovery allows a party to gather information about the opposing party's version of events, legal arguments, and evidence. This information helps the examining party prepare their case for trial and decide on possible strategies, including settlement ...

  6. answers that are responsive to the party conducting the direct examination, the trial judge can permit the party calling the witness to ask leading questions. (Rule 53.01(4)). 2. Cross-examination – After the party who has called the witness completes their direct examination, the opposing party has an opportunity to cross-examine the witness ...

  7. People also ask

  8. “read in” evidence from an examination for discovery (see rule 11), cross-examine deponents of the opposing party’s affidavits (i.e. question the persons that swore/affirmed affidavits supporting the opposing party’s case), re-examine a party’s own deponents, who were cross-examined by the opposing party, and