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

In The News
Aug 24, 2026
David Schultz Reviews a Humorous—But Important—FDCPA Procedural Ruling

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
115 Hinshaw Lawyers Recognized in 2027 Editions of The Best Lawyers in America® and Ones to Watch®

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
Hinshaw’s Landmark Tower Client Project Receives 2026 Top Projects Award

Press Release
Aug 19, 2026
Fernando Rivera-Maissonet Elected as HNBA Region II Governor and Board of Governors Member

Employment Law Observer
Aug 17, 2026
Massachusetts’ First Paid Family Medical Leave Act Verdict Yields $4.75 Million Award

Press Release
Aug 13, 2026
Lauren Campisi Recognized as a 2026 BTI Client Service All-Star by BTI Consulting Group

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Aug 13, 2026
How Will Banks Be Impacted by the Proposed Regulation O Amendments?

Press Release
Aug 12, 2026
William Cook Honored With the Distinguished Service Award by the Chicago Bar Association

Webinar
Aug 12, 2026
John Ryan Presents on "Understanding what is Covered Under the TCPA Today"

In The News
Aug 12, 2026
Scott Seaman Analyzes California’s New Pleading Standards for Excess Insurance Policy Claims



