Because of the portrayal of trials in movies, it is considered common for a witness to finally admit some horrible, damning fact in open court that resolves the case in its entirety (“You can’t handle the truth”)
This rarely happens at trial…but it can happen during the course of filing and answering pleadings, motions and discovery. Certain answers to legal requests can be considered binding forever. These binding answers are called “judicial admissions.”
What Is A Judicial Admission?
“Judicial admissions are defined as deliberate, clear, unequivocal statements by a party about a concrete fact within that party’s knowledge.” In re Estate of Rennick, 692 NE 2d 1150 – Ill: Supreme Court 1998
“A judicial admission can be either documentary or testimonial.” Thomas v. Northington, 479 NE 2d 976 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 1985
If a party to a divorce says or writes something so concretely, that party will be bound to that position for the remainder of the divorce proceedings.
“As a general rule, a statement of fact that has been admitted in a pleading is a judicial admission and is binding on the party making it. Judicial admissions are not evidence and need not be introduced as evidence at trial. Rather, judicial admissions are formal concessions in the pleadings in the case or stipulations by a party or its counsel that have the effect of withdrawing a fact from issue and dispensing wholly with the need for proof of the fact.” Knauerhaze v. Nelson, 836 NE 2d 640 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2005 (citations and internal quotations omitted)
Judicial admissions are the whole point of answering a pleading or a motion. The court can review the pleading, motion and the respective answer and determine what is truly at issue. If the parties are agreed on certain points, the court need not even address those issues via argument or evidence.
Likewise, the facts alleged in a petition or a motion are facts that will be held to be true in the future of the case.
“It is of course true that the allegations contained in a pleading are judicial admissions and are conclusive against the pleader provided the pleading has not been amended, abandoned, or withdrawn.” Precision Extrusions, Inc. v. Stewart, 183 NE 2d 547 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 3rd Div. 1962
Judicial Admission And Discovery Answers
Discovery answers can also be deemed judicial admissions if the admission is clear enough.
“Admissions made pursuant to a request under [a request to admit] are tantamount to judicial admissions, and as such are taken as true.” Mt. Zion Bank v. Consol. Communications, 660 NE 2d 863 – Ill: Supreme Court 1995
“Insofar as discovery is concerned, answers to interrogatories and testimony at evidence and discovery depositions may be treated as judicial admissions” Brummet v. Farel, 576 NE 2d 1232 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1991
If the statement obtained via discovery is exceptionally clear, it can be deemed a judicial admission.
“Although statements made during a discovery deposition are normally treated only as evidentiary admissions, which may be contradicted, such statements may be “so deliberate, detailed, and unequivocal, as to matters with the party’s personal knowledge” that the statements will be held to be judicial admissions.” Caponi v. Larry’s 66, 601 NE 2d 1347 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1992
Most discovery answers will not be deemed a judicial admission.
“[D]isclosure of matter obtained by discovery is not conclusive but may be contradicted” Trapkus v. Edstrom’s, Inc., 489 NE 2d 340 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 1986
Lawyers Making Judicial Admissions
The unsophisticated divorce litigant should be afraid of making a judicial admission that negatively impacts their case. If a litigant testifies, that testimony can be a judicial admission.
“[T]he testimony of a party at the trial of the action, adverse to his cause, may be binding upon him as a judicial admission.” Trapkus v. Edstrom’s, Inc., 489 NE 2d 340 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 1986
However, the litigant’s lawyer is doing most of the talking…and the divorce lawyer can make judicial admissions on the litigant’s behalf.
“An admission by an attorney for a party during trial supersedes all proofs upon the point in question.” Lowe v. Kang, 521 NE 2d 1245 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1988
“[I]t is clear that an attorney’s admission in his opening statement to the jury may be the basis for a finding of a judicial admission. Statements made by an attorney in the course of trial and during cross-examination have been held to be judicial admissions. There are situations where statements made in closing argument, under the circumstances of the case and within the context made, were not judicial admissions. What becomes clear, in our review of the cases, is that whether or not a statement by an attorney in the course of trial is a judicial admission depends upon the circumstances of the individual case and the giving of a consistent meaning to the statement within the context in which it is found.” Lowe v. Kang, 521 NE 2d 1245 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1988
Lawyers certainly do all the writing in a divorce case. A lawyer’s signed pleading, motion or answer can be deemed a judicial admission on the part of his client.
“An admission in an unverified pleading signed by an attorney is binding on the party as a judicial admission.“ Knauerhaze v. Nelson, 836 NE 2d 640 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2005
Undoing A Judicial Admission
Once something is so clearly admitted, there’s no point in discussing that fact or presenting that fact as evidence. A judicial admission is deemed true by the court.
You cannot take back a judicial admission.
“A party cannot create a factual dispute by contradicting a previously made judicial admission.” Burns v. Michelotti, 237 Ill.App.3d 923, 932, 178 Ill.Dec. 621, 604 N.E.2d 1144 (1992)
The only way to undo a judicial admission is to file an appropriate amendment correcting the judicial admission.
“An amendment, complete in itself, which does not refer to or adopt the prior pleading, ordinarily supersedes it and the prior pleading ceases to be a part of the record for most purposes, being in effect abandoned or withdrawn…The same rule applies to an answer to an amended and abandoned complaint.” Precision Extrusions, Inc. v. Stewart, 183 NE 2d 547 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 3rd Div. 1962 (citations omitted)
Just because the statement is no longer a judicial admission does not mean the court cannot consider that statement. An Illinois divorce judge can still consider the statement as evidence that can be weighed if not adopted entirely.
“However, once a pleading is amended, an admission made in an unverified original pleading can only be used as an evidentiary admission and not as a judicial admission. In contrast, original verified pleadings will remain binding as judicial admissions even after the filing of an amended pleading which supersedes the original unless the amended pleading discloses that the original pleading was made through mistake or inadvertence.” Knauerhaze v. Nelson, 836 NE 2d 640 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2005 (citations omitted)
Arguing That A Statement Is Not A Judicial Admission
Because a judicial admission is such an incredible “gotcha” moment, Illinois courts apply the concept of judicial admissions very scrupulously.
“We are mindful of the fact that the doctrine of judicial admissions requires thoughtful study for its application so that justice not be done on the strength of a chance statement made by a nervous party.” Thomas v. Northington, 479 NE 2d 976 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 1985
A statement must meet each of the following requirements to be deemed a judicial admission.
“A judicial admission is a (1) deliberate, (2) clear, (3) unequivocal, (4) statement of a party, (5) about a concrete fact, (6) within that party’s peculiar knowledge.” Brummet v. Farel, 576 NE 2d 1232 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1991
Every judicial admission depends on the context in which it was made.
“What constitutes a judicial admission must be decided under the circumstances in each case, and before a statement can be held to be such an admission, it must be given a meaning consistent with the context in which it was found.” Smith v. Pavlovich, 914 NE 2d 1258 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 2009
Most things in controversy simply cannot be judicial admissions…because they are opinions.
“In order to constitute a judicial admission, a statement must not be a matter of opinion, estimate, appearance, inference, or uncertain summary. It must be an intentional statement that relates to concrete facts and not an unclear summary.” Smith v. Pavlovich, 914 NE 2d 1258 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 2009
Even if a judicial admission is found by the court, that admission can be limited.
“Judicial admissions can be limited in scope.” PEPPER CONST. v. PALMOLIVE TOWER CONDO’S, 59 NE 3d 41 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2016
Judicial Admissions Vs. Evidentiary Admissions
Even if a statement by a divorce litigant is not a judicial admission, the statement can still be submitted for consideration by the court as evidence.
“[O]rdinary evidentiary admissions should be distinguished from judicial admissions, which conclusively bind a party.” In re Estate of Rennick, 692 NE 2d 1150 – Ill: Supreme Court 1998
“Judicial admissions must be distinguished from evidential admissions in that the former are binding and are considered to be incontrovertible. They include pleadings in the case, admissions in open court, stipulations, and admissions made pursuant to requests to admit.” Rosbottom v. Hensley, 209 NE 2d 655 – Ill: Appellate Court, 4th Dist. 1965
“In contrast to judicial admissions, evidentiary admissions must be offered into evidence and are always subject to contradiction or explanation.” Knauerhaze v. Nelson, 836 NE 2d 640 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2005
The distinction between judicial admissions and evidentiary admissions helps explain judicial procedure as a whole. There’s a complicated mess of allegations and the court must determine what is true. Unwinding an entire marriage is certainly more complicated than determining who is at fault in a car accident or whether a crime was committed. The more facts that can be determined by default, the more the judge can focus on the matters where the parties disagree.
Parties to an Illinois divorce will want to establish all favorable facts as judicial admissions and all unfavorable allegations as evidentiary admissions.
“Judicial admissions are not evidence at all, but are formal admissions in the pleadings, or stipulations, oral or written, by a party or his counsel which have the effect of withdrawing a fact from issue and dispensing wholly with the need for proof of the fact. Thus the judicial admission, unless it should be allowed by the court to be withdrawn, is conclusive, whereas the evidential admission is not conclusive (unless the adversary should fail to meet it with contrary evidence) but is always subject to be contradicted or explained.” Precision Extrusions, Inc. v. Stewart, 183 NE 2d 547 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 3rd Div. 1962
Parties to an Illinois divorce may want to stipulate to what is a judicial admission in order to eliminate those issues entirely.
“A stipulation, or a judicial admission, is an agreement between the parties or their attorneys with respect to business before the court.” Lee v. Chicago Transit Authority, 605 NE 2d 493 – Ill: Supreme Court 1992
Judicial Admissions And Judicial Estoppel
Judicial admissions are really just specific instances of judicial estoppel.
Judicial estoppel is something “that prevents a party from contradicting previous declarations made during the same or an earlier proceeding if the change in position would adversely affect the proceeding or constitute a fraud on the court.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019)
“‘It is fundamental to our adversarial process that a party waives his right to complain of an error where to do so is inconsistent with the position taken by the party in an earlier court proceeding.’” McMath v. Katholi, 191 Ill. 2d 251, 255 (2000) (quoting Auton v. Logan Landfill, Inc., 105 Ill. 2d 537, 543 (1984))
Any possible judicial admission can be buttressed or rebuked by a secondary/supplemental judicial estoppel analysis.
“Five elements are generally required for the doctrine of judicial estoppel to apply: the party to be estopped must have (1) taken two positions, (2) that are factually inconsistent, (3) in separate judicial or quasi-judicial administrative proceedings, (4) intending for the trier of fact to accept the truth of the facts alleged, and (5) have succeeded in the first proceeding and received some benefit from it.” People v. Caballero, 206 Ill.2d 65, 80, 276 Ill.Dec. 356, 794 N.E.2d 251 (2002).
Like judicial admissions, courts apply judicial estoppel sparingly as these concepts literally deny the admitter/estopped their day in court.
“Accordingly, courts have warned that the doctrine of judicial estoppel is `an extraordinary one which should be applied with caution, because it “precludes a contradictory position without examining the truth of either statement.”‘” Ceres Terminals, Inc., 259 Ill.App.3d at 856-57, 200 Ill.Dec. 146, 635 N.E.2d 485, quoting Scott v. Land Span Motor, Inc., 781 F.Supp. 1115, 1119 (D.S.C.1991), quoting Teledyne Industries, Inc., 911 F.2d at 1218.
In a divorce court, no one is going to warn you that “anything you say and do will be used against you in a court of law.” Hire a divorce attorney who knows when to keep their mouth shut and advises you to do the same. Contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce lawyer.
