Heinze v. Bauer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “statements made on behalf of a client . . . are not personal admissions that may be used against the attorney in subsequent litigation”
• examining whether the estopped party “should have recognized any mistakes” in his original position
• \statements made on behalf of a client in the course of representation are not personal admissions that may be used against the attorney in subsequent litigation\
• “Normally, a party would not be entitled to rely on an un-sworn document that he or she authored in order to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).