Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

Objections at Trial (FL)

by Practical Law Litigation

Maintained • Florida

A Practice Note explaining objections counsel can make at a civil trial in Florida state court,
including general and specific objections to evidence, testimony, exhibits, and examination
questions. This Note explains common trial objections, which include objections to form,
authenticity, witness qualifications, relevance, and hearsay, and addresses the issues
counsel should consider before trial commences such as the testimony and evidence likely
to be introduced at trial, who will introduce the evidence, what foundation counsel must
lay, and whether any anticipated objections require pre-trial preparation.

The Contemporaneous Objection Rule

Prepare to Make Objections at Trial
When and How to Object
Timing of Objections

How to Object

Type of Objection: General or Specific Speaking Objection

Common Trial Objections

Objections To Form

Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications

Objections to Documents, Things, and Demonstrative Evidence

Objections During Opening and Closing Statements

Objection Motions
Motions in Limine

Motions to Strike

Opportunities to object arise at every stage of trial. When preparing to try to a case, counsel should be familiar
with the different types of objections available at trial and understand how to make them. Counsel may need
to make a motion in limine to obtain an advance ruling on evidentiary matters. Sometimes counsel must
make a motion to strike testimony or evidence from the trial record. This Note explains when and how to object

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

at trial in a Florida state civil action, sets out common trial objections, and describes the considerations for
preserving objections for appeal.

The Contemporaneous Objection Rule

Before preparing for and attending trial, counsel must understand the contemporaneous objection rule. Under
Florida's contemporaneous objection rule, counsel must generally make objections to conduct at trial at the
time the challenged conduct occurs. A contemporaneous objection is generally necessary to preserve the
issue for appeal. (Universal Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Warfel, 82 So. 3d 47, 64 (Fla. 2012).)

The contemporaneous objection rule applies to:

• The improper admission of evidence.

• The insufficiency of evidence.

• Inappropriate argument of counsel.

• Incorrect jury instructions.

• Challenges to expert qualifications and testimony.

• Attorney misconduct.

• Other irregularities or objectionable conduct at trial for which a legal basis exists to object.

(Universal Ins. Co. of N. Am., 82 So. 3d at 64; Companioni v. City of Tampa, 51 So. 3d 452, 455 (Fla. 2010);
Philip Morris Inc. v. French, 897 So. 2d 480, 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Murphy v. Int'l Robotics Sys., Inc., 710
So. 2d 587, 589 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).)

There are exceptions to the contemporaneous objection rule. For example, the rule does not apply where a
party challenges the sufficiency of evidence presented at a bench trial because Florida Rule of Civil Procedure
1.530(e) preserves those objections in non-jury actions. (Lacombe v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Tr. Co., 149 So. 3d
152, 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).)

Similarly, objections that relate to a fundamental error remain preserved for appeal even if counsel fail to make
a contemporaneous objection. A fundamental error is an error that goes to the foundation of the case or the
merits of the cause of action. That is, the error must challenge the validity of the trial itself. (Universal Ins. Co.
of N. Am., 82 So. 3d at 64; Jaimes v. State, 51 So. 3d 445, 448 (Fla. 2010).)

Even where a party makes a contemporaneous objection at trial, the party may still need to move timely for
a mistrial to preserve the issue for a motion for new trial or for appeal if the objection relates to attorney
misconduct (Companioni v. City of Tampa, 51 So. 3d 452, 456 (Fla. 2010); Roundtree v. State, 362 So. 2d
1347, 1348 (Fla. 1978)).

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

Prepare to Make Objections at Trial

Before trial begins, counsel should anticipate and develop a strategy for objecting to improper testimony
and evidence they expect counsel for the other parties to offer at trial. A well prepared strategy can prevent
unfavorable or improper evidence from entering the record at trial and preserve issues for appeal if the court
overrules counsel's objections. While it may not be possible to anticipate all objections, for example objections
to the form of a question, counsel should generally understand which objections are available and be ready
to object at the appropriate time (see Objections to Form).

For objections that counsel can anticipate, counsel should prepare in advance of trial by considering:

• The witnesses, testimony, and evidence examining counsel is likely to introduce at trial.

• The available objections to any expected testimony, document, or piece of evidence, including:

• the party likely to introduce the evidence;

• the questions examining counsel must ask to lay a proper foundation for and authenticate the
evidence (see Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications);

• the available substantive or procedural objections to the testimony or evidence; and

• whether to draft a short memorandum with key cases supporting the objections, printed in
advance of trial to hand to the judge and opposing counsel if an anticipated objection arises.

Strategically, even when an objection is warranted, attorneys sometimes do not object. For example, making
repeated objections to minor insignificant or technical issues may annoy the judge or jury and unnecessarily
delay the trial. Objecting to harmful testimony or evidence may also call unwanted attention to it, particularly
in a jury trial. Counsel can also withhold an objection when they know the court will eventually admit the
evidence or testimony (for example, objecting to foundation when counsel knows examining counsel can lay
the foundation).

However, objecting is often necessary and important, particularly when preserving an issue for appeal, to
prevent the admission of harmful evidence or testimony and to prevent a witness from answering objectionable
questions that may elicit damaging testimony. Making an objection can also interrupt opposing counsel's flow
and, in jury trials, create an opportunity to present a speaking objection in front of the jury (if the court permits
speaking objections).

Generally, before making an objection, counsel should consider whether:

• There is a legal basis for the objection.

• There is some practical reason for the objection.

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• It is likely the court will sustain the objection.

If counsel fail to object, resulting in harmful testimony or evidence coming into evidence, they should consider
moving to strike (see Motions to Strike).

When and How to Object

Knowing when and how to object is critical to ensure the court rules timely on the objection and counsel
preserves an adverse ruling for appellate review.

Timing of Objections

Counsel should object immediately after the objectionable conduct occurs (for example, when opposing
counsel asks an improper question, asks a question that calls for improper testimony, or introduces an improper
exhibit) because:

• A timely objection may prevent damaging testimony, evidence, or remarks from influencing the jury.

• Failure to object promptly may result in a waiver of the objection (see The Contemporaneous
Objection Rule).

If counsel cannot timely object (before a witness answers an objectionable question, for example), counsel
may still preserve the issue for appeal by moving immediately to strike the testimony or evidence from the trial
record (see Motions to Strike).

How to Object

Typically, counsel should stand when making an objection at trial. If it is apparent that a question warrants an
objection, counsel should stand during the question and object immediately after the question is finished. This
most often prevents the witness from answering the question before the court has a chance to rule on the
objection. There are certain times it is beneficial to interrupt the question, for example to prevent examining
counsel from reading prejudicial testimony or other evidence to the jury, but ordinarily counsel must wait until
examining counsel finishes their question before objecting.

A proper objection that preserves the issue for appeal must be specific enough to identify the putative error to
the trial judge and preserve the issue for "intelligent review" on appeal (Universal Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Warfel,
82 So. 3d 47, 64 (Fla. 2012) (citing Castor v. State, 365 So. 2d 701, 703 (Fla. 1978)). Similarly, Florida law
requires a timely objection stating the specific ground of objection if that ground is not apparent from context
(§ 90.104(1)(b), Fla. Stat.). The proper preservation of error for an appeal typically requires:

• A timely, contemporaneous objection at the time of the error.

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• Assertion of the legal ground for the objection.

• The argument on appeal must be the same contention asserted as the legal ground for the objection
at trial.

(Aills v. Boemi, 29 So. 3d 1105, 1108 (Fla. 2010); Hentze v. Denys, 88 So. 3d 307, 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012);
City of Orlando v. Pineiro, 66 So. 3d 1064, 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).)

Florida courts have explained that there are no magic words required to make a proper objection, as long as
the objection satisfies these components (Aills, 29 So. 3d at 1108; Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbins,
914 So. 2d 925, 928 (Fla. 2005)).

On counsel's objection, the court may immediately make a ruling or it may order a sidebar before ruling. A
sidebar is a conference between the judge and counsel during trial that the court typically holds at the judge's
bench so the jury cannot hear the discussion.

However the court proceeds, it is counsel's responsibility to ensure the court makes a ruling on the objection.
Failure to obtain a ruling waives the issue on appeal unless the judge deliberately refuses to rule. (P.D.K., Inc.
v. Madeline, 291 So. 3d 134, 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020); Fi-Evergreen Woods, LLC v. Robinson, 135 So. 3d
331, 333 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013); Hamilton v. R.L. Best Int'l, 996 So. 2d 233, 235 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).) To ensure
the court rules on an objection, or to otherwise obtain the court's refusal to rule on the record, counsel should
request a ruling with the court reporter present to transcribe the request and response.

Type of Objection: General or Specific Speaking Objection

Counsel may make a general objection to testimony or evidence by simply stating "objection," without stating
the specific reason for the objection. Some courts allow counsel to state the basis for its objection, called
a specific or speaking objection (for example, "objection: leading," "objection: hearsay," or "objection: asked
and answered"). Sometimes, however, judges do not permit speaking objections and counsel may only say
"objection" and wait for the court's ruling. Counsel should ask the court during the pre-trial conference whether
the court permits speaking objections.

Even where the court does not permit speaking objections at the time counsel make the objection, counsel
must make them and supply the legal basis on the record to preserve any error for appeal (Universal Ins. Co.
of N. Am., 82 So. 3d at 64; Aills, 29 So. 3d at 1108; see The Contemporaneous Objection Rule). Counsel can
do so by making the specific objection at a sidebar or during a break in the trial outside the presence of the
jury. When counsel believe that a specific objection is necessary to properly preserve the issue for appellate
review, counsel should make a request to place their objection on the record and remember to make that
record at the appropriate time.

Common Trial Objections

Objections To Form

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

An objection to form is an objection to the manner (or way) in which counsel asks a question. The most typical
objections to the form of an examining counsel's questions include:

• Leading. A leading question is one asked in a way that suggests an answer to the witness. Often,
but not always, leading questions ask for a yes or no answer (Porter v. State, 386 So. 2d 1209, 1211
(Fla. 3d DCA 1980). They are generally permitted on cross-examination but not on direct examination,
subject to certain exceptions (§ 90.612(3), Fla. Stat.; Erp v. Carroll, 438 So. 2d 31, 36 (Fla. 5th DCA
1983)). For example, counsel may lead a witness on direct examination if the witness is hostile or if
the court permits the leading question as necessary to develop the witness's testimony (§ 90.612(3),
Fla. Stat.).

• Argumentative. A question is argumentative when its purpose is to badger, belittle, impose a position
or conclusion on, or harass or intimidate a witness. The court must protect witnesses from harassment
or undue embarrassment (§ 90.612(1)(c), Fla. Stat.; see Recco v. State, 264 So. 3d 273, 275 (Fla.
5th DCA 2019) (court can set reasonable limits to protect witness from harassment, prejudice, or
confusion)). Attorneys most frequently ask argumentative questions on cross-examination of hostile or
adverse witnesses.

• Compound question. A question is compound if it is actually multiple questions or a single question

with multiple parts asked together. Counsel generally use the words "and" or "or" in compound
questions. Courts typically allow examining counsel to withdraw a compound question and ask it as
separate, individual questions.

• Vague, ambiguous, or misleading. Counsel should make this objection when the question is unclear
or too complicated for the witness to understand and properly answer. For example, a question
that asks about a person by only stating a pronoun may be vague if it is not clear which person the
examining counsel is asking about.

• Asked and answered. This objection is available when examining counsel ask a witness the same
question many times, typically to repeat favorable testimony or call a jury's attention to a specific point
of evidence (see McCall v. State, 463 So. 2d 425, 426 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (court can limit repetitive
questioning)).

• Calls for speculation. A question typically calls for speculation if it asks a fact witness about facts
beyond the witness's personal knowledge or requires a witness to guess an answer. Likewise, a
question that asks an expert witness to provide facts beyond their expertise, personal knowledge, or
about facts not in the record is also objectionable as calling for speculation.

• Calls for an opinion or conclusion. Typically, a fact witness may testify only about facts in their
personal knowledge and cannot offer opinions or conclusions. Generally, only experts can provide
opinion testimony (§ 90.702, Fla. Stat.). If a fact witness begins to provide opinion testimony, courts
often sustain objections on the basis that the fact witness's testimony impermissibly extended into
expert witness opinion testimony (see, for example, Fittipaldi USA, Inc. v. Castroneves, 905 So. 2d
182, 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)).

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 6

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• Calls for a narrative answer. Narrative testimony is often but not always prohibited. Ordinarily, a
question that is not narrowly tailored but instead asks a witness to tell a story, explain what happened,
or offer an account of the facts without answering specific questions is objectionable as calling for a
narrative answer. Courts may permit narrative testimony if counsel believe their witness may commit
perjury and asks the court for permission to offer the witness's testimony in narrative form.

• Mischaracterizes the witness's prior testimony, misquotes testimony, or misstates the

evidence. Counsel should object when the examining attorney attempts to quote, summarize, or
restate a witness's testimony, as the quote or summary may not be exactly accurate. Instead, the
testimony should speak for itself. Counsel may need to make a motion to strike such a statement or
question (see Motions to Strike).

• Assumes facts not in evidence. This objection often arises when the examining attorney skips a
question that is a foundation for a follow-up question. This can also occur where, for example, an
examining attorney asks the witness a hypothetical question grounded in an assumption for which no
evidence exists in the record (see, for example, Body Works, Inc. v. Chavez, 606 So. 2d 1273, 1274
(Fla. 1st DCA 1992)).

When making a specific objection on one of these grounds, attorneys say "objection" followed by the specific
basis for the objection (for example, "objection, calls for speculation"). When the form of a question is proper
but the response is objectionable, counsel may move to strike the answer (see Motions to Strike).

Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications

Counsel may object to the substance of a witness's testimony or to a witness's qualifications to give certain
testimony. These objections may arise where, for example, a witness attempts to offer testimony on matters
about which they have no personal knowledge, a fact witness not disclosed as an expert attempts to offer
testimony that requires specialized knowledge or expertise, or where an expert witness attempts to offer
testimony on a subject matter beyond their expertise.

Common objections to a witness's substantive testimony or to a witness's qualifications, which may also be
used to object to documents and other things, include:

• Hearsay. Hearsay is an out of court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matters
asserted. It is inadmissible in evidence unless it falls within a recognized exception to the hearsay rule
and the proponent shows that the evidence being offered is reliable and relevant. (§§ 90.801; 90.803;
90.804, Fla. Stat.; see also Using Documents as Evidence Checklist (FL): Hearsay.)

• Lacks foundation. Counsel may object to testimony or other evidence on the ground that it lacks
foundation. Foundation is the basis, or preliminary information, that counsel must obtain from a
witness before a court may receive certain testimony or documents into evidence. To lay a foundation,
the examining counsel asks a witness with personal knowledge a series of questions to establish, for
example:

• the witness's competency or qualifications to testify about the subject matter in issue;

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 7

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• the relevancy of a document or a witness's testimony; or

• the authenticity of documents or other physical evidence (in other words, testimony showing that
the evidence is what the witness claims it is).

Counsel should object based on lack of foundation when another party is attempting to offer testimony
or exhibits without an adequate legal or factual basis for their admission into evidence. Some Florida
courts do not consider a lack of foundation objection as stating the "specific ground" of objection,
as required by Section 90.104(1)(b), Florida Statutes. As a result, counsel must also alert the trial
court what was missing from the foundation to preserve a ruling on that objection for appellate review.
Counsel therefore must have a thorough understanding of the rules of evidence, including the hearsay
rule and its exceptions, before making an objection based on lack of foundation. (Couzo v. State, 830
So. 2d 177, 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); see also Perera v. State, 873 So. 2d 389, 391 (Fla. 3d DCA
2004); Whittington v. State, 656 So. 2d 1346, 1348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).)

• Irrelevant. Testimony and evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to prove or disprove a material
fact in the case (§ 90.401, Fla. Stat.); Honeywell Int'l, Inc. v. Guilder, 23 So. 3d 867, 870 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2009); Jordan ex rel. Shealey v. Masters, 821 So. 2d 342, 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)). Relevant
testimony and evidence may still be inadmissible if:

• it violates another rule (for example, the rule against hearsay); or

• its probative value is outweighed by the danger that the testimony would confuse the main issue,
mislead the jury, or needlessly present cumulative evidence (§ 90.403, Fla. Stat.; Honeywell Int'l,
Inc., 23 So. 3d at 870).

• Outside the scope of examination. Trial attorneys are typically limited to cross, redirect, and recross
examining a witness about topics previously covered in the scope of the witness's examination. When
an examining attorney asks questions outside of these limits, counsel may object on the ground that
it is outside the scope of the preceding examination. However, the court may permit the inquiry in its
discretion. (§ 90.612(2), Fla. Stat.; Olsen v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 343 So. 3d 172, 174 (Fla. 3d DCA
2022).)

• Cumulative. Evidence is cumulative if it is repetitive or tends to prove an issue already established

through different evidence. Whether to admit or exclude cumulative evidence is within the trial judge's
discretion. (Thompson v. U.S. Sugar Corp., 548 So. 2d 1171, 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).)

• Failure to qualify as an expert or offer expert testimony. Courts may exclude experts and their
opinions if an expert does not have relevant qualifications or intends to offer testimony that is not
helpful or does not require expertise (see Practice Note, Motions in Limine (FL): Challenges to Expert
Testimony). Counsel should object to a witness offered as an expert if that witness:

• intends to offer testimony or evidence on a subject matter that is generally within the knowledge
or understanding of an average person;

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 8

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• intends to offer expert testimony that does not help the jury or the court better understand the
evidence or determine a fact in issue;

• is not qualified to offer their opinions on the subject matters in issue;

• cannot provide a proper basis or foundation for their opinions; or

• for novel scientific theories or methods, does not base their opinions on scientific principles or
procedures that are generally accepted as reliable.

Objections to Documents, Things, and Demonstrative Evidence

Many of the objections available for documents and things are also available for witness testimony. Common
objections to documents and other items a party may seek to introduce at trial include:

• Failure to authenticate. Counsel must prove an item is what a witness claims it is before a court
can admit the item into evidence (§ 90.901, Fla. Stat.; Walker v. Harley-Anderson, 301 So. 3d 299,
301 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020); Burdeshaw v. Bank of New York Mellon, 148 So. 3d 819, 823 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2014)). To authenticate evidence, counsel must lay a foundation to prove the evidence is
genuine. However, certain evidence is self-authenticating and does not require extrinsic evidence of
authenticity, such as certain official records (§ 90.902, Fla. Stat.). For information on objecting when
counsel fails to lay a foundation, see Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications.

• Violates the best evidence rule. Under the best evidence rule, unless an exception applies, where
the contents of a written document are disputed and a party seeks to prove them, that party must
produce an original writing (see Using Documents as Evidence Checklist (FL): Best Evidence Rule).

• Hearsay (See Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications).

• Irrelevant (See Objections to Substantive Testimony and Witness Qualifications).

• Privileged. If the examining attorney seeks to elicit testimony or introduce evidence that is privileged,
counsel should object. For more information on the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine,
see

• Practice Note, Work Product Doctrine (FL).

• Practice Note, Attorney-Client Privilege: Privileged Parties (FL).

• Practice Note, Attorney-Client Privilege: Privileged Communications (FL).

• Practice Note, Attorney-Client Privilege: Waiver (FL).

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 9

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

Counsel should also prepare to object to any demonstrative evidence the opposing party attempts to display
at trial. Demonstrative evidence include things like timelines, models, slide shows, photograph blowups,
graphics, charts, computer animations and simulations, videos, or other visual aids. The court has discretion
to allow demonstrative evidence, but counsel should object if the evidence is not relevant, not helpful, or may
mislead, confuse, divert, or prejudice the fact finder or their client (see Harris v. State, 843 So. 2d 856, 864
(Fla. 2003); Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Laliberte, 52 So. 3d 31, 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)). The same objections
to documents and other evidence are available when counsel seeks to use demonstrative evidence or admit
it into evidence (for example, failure to authenticate, hearsay, lack of foundation, and so on).

Objections During Opening and Closing Statements

The objections available during the heart of a trial differ from those available during opening statements
and closing statements (also called closing arguments or summations). Although counsel may object during
opening and closing statements, and must do so to preserve their objections for appeal, counsel should
consider the prudence and timing of their objections. Objections are somewhat limited during opening and
closing statements, and are often disfavored. For strategic reasons, sometimes attorneys seek advance
permission from the court to place their objections on the record after the conclusion of opposing counsel's
opening or closing statement.

However, during an opening or closing statement, counsel should consider objecting if the statement contains
inflammatory or prejudicial argument. Both the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar and Florida case law caution
attorneys against inflammatory or prejudicial argument, which includes:

• Making arguments unsupported by admissible evidence.

• Asserting personal knowledge of facts in dispute.

• Stating a personal opinion regarding:

• the justness of a cause;

• the credibility of a witness; or

• the culpability of a civil litigant.

(FL ST BAR Rule 4-3.4; City of Orlando v. Pineiro, 66 So. 3d 1064, 1069 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).)

Objection Motions
Florida law does not require counsel to make motions during trial in writing and instead counsel can make trial
motions orally (Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.100(b)).

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 10

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

Motions in Limine

A motion in limine permits a party to obtain a preliminary order from the trial court on the admissibility of
evidence, usually before the trial begins. Generally, counsel use motions in limine in jury trials to exclude or
limit evidence before it is offered to the jury. Examples of motions in limine include motions to limit the scope of
testimony or the admission of a particular piece of evidence listed on the opposing party's pre-trial exhibit list.
Counsel may make motions in limine orally, although in most circumstances it is best to make them in writing
within the time frame set out by the court. Courts often set deadlines for motions in limine so counsel should
review any preliminary or pretrial orders.

A ruling on a motion in limine is generally not directly appealable. To preserve the issues raised in a motion in
limine for appeal, the losing party often must take additional steps at trial. Florida law only preserves objections
raised in a motion in limine and denied by the court if the court made a "definitive ruling" on the record (§
90.104(1)(b), Fla. Stat.). Absent a definitive ruling, counsel must renew the objection at trial or ask the court's
permission to put the objection on the record before the start of trial outside the presence of the jury.

To avoid a dispute over whether the trial court made a definitive ruling, counsel should always renew the
objection at trial. Failure to renew the objection at trial after the court denied a pretrial motion in limine risks
waiving the issue for appellate review. Multiple Florida courts have generally held that a motion in limine, by
itself, is insufficient to preserve the error for appellate review. Counsel must also make a contemporaneous
objection when the evidence is offered at trial. (Horne v. Hudson, 772 So. 2d 556, 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000);
Philip Morris Inc. v. French, 897 So. 2d 480, 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Rindfleisch v. Carnival Cruise Lines,
Inc., 498 So. 2d 488, 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).)

For a detailed discussion on making motions in limine, including evidentiary objections to consider raising by
motions in limine and how to preserve arguments raised in a motion in limine for appeal, see Practice Note,
Motions in Limine (FL).

Motions to Strike

A motion to strike is a request that the court strike testimony from the record or strike an item from evidence to
prevent consideration of improper material that was disclosed before it could have been prevented. Typically,
counsel make a motion to strike where a witness reveals inadmissible evidence in response to an otherwise
unobjectionable question. (State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gage, 611 So. 2d 39, 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).)
Counsel should accompany every motion to strike with a request for an instruction that the jury disregard the
evidence or remark improperly disclosed.

Counsel typically make motions to strike verbally, during a trial, when:

• A witness offers a prejudicial answer to a proper question that counsel could not have anticipated from
the question.

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 11

Objections at Trial (FL), Practical Law Practice Note w-040-5628

• Counsel excusably fail to make an objection earlier. For example, if the court makes a ruling admitting
evidence before counsel has had a chance to object, counsel can move to strike admission of the
evidence.

• A witness or opposing counsel makes inappropriate or gratuitous remarks.

• The court allows testimony subject to connection and opposing counsel fails to connect the testimony.

• The court admits evidence and later testimony proves the evidence is inadmissible.

If the court grants the motion to strike, the fact finder (the judge in a bench trial or jury in a jury trial) should
disregard the stricken testimony or evidence. In jury trials, counsel should ask the court to instruct the jury to
disregard stricken testimony or evidence if the court fails to do so.

© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 12