“Fishing expedition.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fishing%20expedition. Retrieved 27 September 2022. In law, a fishing expedition is an attempt to gather evidence using tactics such as vague questions for someone on the witness stand or in testimony or extensive legal investigations during discovery to gain access to compromising documents. People can also use this term to describe situations where a lawyer threatens a lawsuit or other legal action in mind, not necessarily with the law on their side. Former friends of late Prime Minister Edward Heath complained that Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale had led a “fishing expedition” as part of an “unsatisfactory and biased” investigation that cost £1.5 million and had provided “no convincing evidence” that Heath had ever sexually assaulted anyone. according to Lord Hunt of Wirral. [4] “The only constitutional limitation of subpoena search is that it is not hopelessly broad or highly incriminating. If compliance required the submission of virtually all of a company`s records, or if the burden of sorting records almost paralyzed normal business operations, the subpoena is void. Perhaps the confusion lies in the use of the metaphor “fishing expedition”. The term is used to characterize the assignment that is vague or too complete.
[5] If a person suspects that a fishing expedition is beyond the scope of the Act, they may request the intervention of a judge. The judge may review the behaviour in question and decide whether to continue, or order the person to stop and issue a warning about future episodes of similar behaviour. @Melonlity — there are objections to that. One party may send many interrogations and requests for submission to another, but this does not mean that all these questions must be answered and all documents provided. There are times when a fishing expedition is simply used to harass the opposing party in a case. For example, let`s say you have a car accident case and the defendant is represented by an insurance company. The plaintiff is represented by a lawyer from a small firm that doesn`t have a ton of resources to hear the case. Yes, the judge can uphold the objection and order the jury to ignore the issue. But how many judges will actually be able to ignore the issue? If they do not answer, jurors may wonder what the accused is trying to hide. Once a negative impression of the accused is created, it can be more difficult for the jury to see their side of the story and make an impartial decision. A party can object to anything unreasonable, and a good lawyer will do so if confronted with a fishing expedition during the discovery process.
A fishing expedition is an informal and pejorative term for a non-specific search for information, especially incriminating information. It is most often organized by police authorities. In the discovery process, where people on both sides of a case must exchange certain types of evidence and may submit questions and orders to hand over certain materials, a fishing expedition can be a common tactic. People may not have enough information to feel safe to take the matter to court, but they might be able to find something with a little fishing. They may formulate vague questions in the hope of getting someone to make a confession that would help their case, or they may interpret document orders and other documents generally to get as much information as possible. In pre-litigation proceedings, so-called “fishing expeditions” are massive and aimless calls to all documents related to the dispute: in the United States, they are allowed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1). This rule is repeated in the rules of procedure of many States: “The parties may obtain advance communication for any matter that is not privileged and relevant. if the information requested appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The vagueness of the definition of relevant evidence is generally interpreted as a “liberal” production.
The well-funded insurance company may offload a series of questioning on the complainant to increase legal fees and force a settlement. These sample phrases are automatically selected from various online information sources to reflect the current use of the word “fishing expedition”. The views expressed in the examples do not represent the views of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us your feedback. From an ethical point of view, fishing expeditions are inherently dubious. In court, a lawyer may reject questions that are too vague or too general on the grounds that they are not directly relevant to the case and could cause a witness to testify in a prejudicial manner. The judge may uphold it if the attempt clearly appears to be fishing, or he may lift the objection and continue the questioning, usually with a warning to ensure the lawyer gets straight to the point quickly. People often use this term pejoratively when someone seems to be reaching out to put a case together. The person leading the fishing expedition usually wants to do so subtly to avoid alerting people that they do not have a strong case or that they are afraid of information that could be presented to the court.
In some cases, the other party may use evidence of a weak case to push for an agreement or settlement. A colloquial term where a party makes claims that are very unlikely to present relevant evidence in the hope of having a high chance of finding unknown relevant evidence. Dropping a bait in the hope of having the chance to catch a fish can also be an attempt to trick the solicited party into incurring high costs to find evidence with no real chance of discovering results. One of them can actually be very detrimental during a process. For example, a lawyer could ask a question that, if answered, would cause a jury to think less about an accused. Even if counsel for the defendant objects, the issue could prejudice the defendant`s case. In Britain, Abu Hamza and Yaser al-Sirri[1], Jim Davidson[2] and the late Edward Heath[3] were described in the media as subjected to this tactic. Black`s Law Dictionary. HENRY CAMPBELL BLACK, M. A.
1990. Such a practice is unsavory, but it is a common tactic.
