This is really bad logic. In you are in a legal proceeding with findings of fact and conclusions of law there are certain standards you must meet and that fact might be determinative to a legal conclusion therefore it would be legal malpractice to not lay the foundation through a witness that such action is important and necessary… without it you would likely not meet the legal standard they must argue and billing their client 2-3k per hour for trial time. But just because something is said to meet a legal standard does not make it detrimental to the internal corporate strategy of an entity….