The Art of Cross-Examination

Any trial lawyer has heard of this book and many probably have it. That doesn't mean that they have read it. The reason for having the book is that it has been around so long--the author was a trial lawyer in the late 1800s--that everyone feels that they must have it. The reason they have not read it is because it is very difficult and seems so outdated. The practice of law has changed considerably since the late 1800s.

Much of what Wellman has to say is not practical anymore and the cases he relies on have no real parrallels to litigation today. Even some of his techniques--no matter what the case--are now considered wrong. Think how much the practice of medicine has changed since the 1800s!

One simple example that trial lawyers can relate to is that Wellman suggests that once you impeach a witness with a prior inconsistent statement, you should then confront the witness and say, "Which statement is true?" He then instructs that you should keep arguing with the witness about which statement is true. Whether this was successful in the 1880s is impossible to know, but any good trial lawyer knows that it is an unsuccessful technique today.

Having said all this, the book does provide a good historical account of trial practice and is worthy of reading if that is your goal.

I heard about this book from a well known scholar and professor. Therefore, I thought it would be what I needed to really learn how to cross examine. However, THIS BOOK IS TERRIBLE. He has outdated examples and the majority of the stories are war stories that fit only the circumstances described. I would not recommend this book to anyone. I am a prosecutor and when I used this book for cross exams I found it provided no real aid. This book has a big reputation but offers little substance.

An outstanding book with excellent examples of the use of cross-examinations. Not just for lawyers. Really anyone dealing with matters depending on the observations of their fellow humans can benefit from this little gem.

As soon as they're hired, each of my new associates always recieves this book as a gift.

The reason for this is twofold. On the one hand this book, dating from more than a century ago, imparts the kindly sensibilities the practice of law once had (and really, should still have).

On the other hand, this book is masterful in its treatment of the process of cross examining witnesses.

Second in significance only to the selection of a jury, the process of cross examination is key to winning jury trials. This is because admissions tendered by the opposing party can eliminate disputed issues or focus attention on credibility problems.

Though Wellman often goes into great detail in explaining his examples, it's been my experience that new attorneys to the field cannot help but benefit from such complete treatments.

In this way, Wellman leads by example both in relation to his gentility and his prowess.

Recently had to defend myself in an administrative proceeding, the chapter on cross examination of the pejured witness was excellent and most useful. While the old adage that "the lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client" still applies, sometimes one has to represent oneself and if so, this book is invaluable, it is also useful to understand lawyers' techniques in a trial as well even when represented by one.

Kenneth Zahl, MD