Advocacy Statements Made by Attorney Cannot Later Be Used as Admissions in Legal Malpractice Action
Lawyers for the Profession® Alert | 1 min read
Apr 4, 2019
Power Control Devices, Inc. v. Lerner, 2019 Kan. App. LEXIS 5 (Ct. App. Jan. 25, 2019)
Brief Summary
An attorney's statements in the course of representing a client are not admissions and cannot be used as such against the attorney in a subsequent legal malpractice case.
Complete Summary
The Kansas Court of Appeals recently analyzed whether an attorney's statements in support of his client during the underlying litigation could be used as evidence against the attorney in a subsequent legal malpractice case.
The underlying case was highly technical and required the use of expert testimony; however, plaintiff did not present any expert testimony in support of its subsequent legal malpractice case. Instead, plaintiff in the legal malpractice case attempted to rely on the attorney's statements during the course of the underlying case as "admissions" to prove the malpractice case.
The appellate court determined the attorneys statements were not admissions; the statements were advocacy that could not be used as evidence against the attorney in the malpractice case. Specifically, the court noted "[a]n attorney is an advocate for his or her client and is always trying to put the best case forward. But in a legal malpractice action, an attorney's opinion of the case, the attorney's pleadings or filings in the case, or even the attorney's puffing about his or her abilities to prevail, is not evidence of any of the claims made in the underlying lawsuit." Power Control Devices, 2019 Kan. App. LEXIS 5, at *19-20.
Because the legal malpractice plaintiff did not present expert testimony in support of its case and could not use the attorney's statements as admissions, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment as a matter of law in favor of the attorney.
Significance of Decision
Kansas joins other courts across the country in recognizing that statements made by lawyers on their clients' behalf in underlying litigation are not admissions in subsequent legal malpractice actions. See, e.g., Heinze v. Bauer, 145 Idaho 232, 238, 178 P.3d 597 (2008).
Featured Insights

Press Release
Jul 15, 2026
Two Hinshaw Partners Recognized in Minnesota Monthly's 2026 Top Lawyers in Minnesota

Event
July 13-15, 2026
Hinshaw Proudly Sponsors 2026 Lavender Law Conference and Career Fair

Webinar
Jul 14, 2026
Scott Seaman Presents on Horizontal vs. Vertical Exhaustion of Insurance

Healthcare Alert
Jul 8, 2026
A New Era of Compliance Standards for California DSOs and MSOs After the Aspen Dental Settlement

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 7, 2026
What Insurers Need to Know About California’s FAIR Plan Assessment Recoupment Guidance

In The News
Jul 6, 2026
Francesco Palanda’s Practical Guide for Mitigating AI-Related Business Interruption Risk

Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter
Jun 29, 2026
Beyond Malpractice: The Rising Threat of Privacy and Statutory Claims Against Lawyers

In The News
Jun 26, 2026
Brian McGrath Discusses Far-Reaching Impact of a NY Foreclosure Ruling on Mortgage Industry




