We all know the admonition from Miranda v. Arizona—anything you say may be used against you. The question lawyers need to ponder—and adversaries need to pounce upon—is whether that same admonition applies to what lawyers say in their openings and closings, with the added concern that the warning will be anything you say SHALL be used against you, and you can't dispute it.

The principle at issue is what is called a binding judicial admission, and its roots can be traced back to at least 1880, when the U.S. Supreme Court stated that "in the trial of a cause the admissions of counsel, as to matters to be proved, are constantly received and acted upon. They may dispense with proof of facts for which witnesses would otherwise be called." See Oscanyan v. Winchester Repeating Arms, 103 U.S. 261 at p. 263, 26 L.Ed. 539 (1880).