During a trial, you make a statement regarding a Supreme Court precedent that you believe applies directly to the case at bar. You represent to the court and the jury that the precedent relieves your client of all liability and even quote the precedent verbatim by reading from your notes during the closing argument. The jury goes into deliberations and while waiting in the courtroom for a verdict to be returned, you realize you quoted not from a Supreme Court precedent but actually from a persuasive authority that does not control your jurisdiction. You are quite sure that while helpful to your case, and directly applicable, your client would prevail even without your mistake. As you try to decide what to do, the bailiff appears and announces the jury has a verdict and will be coming back to the courtroom shortly. What is the most ethical course of action you could take without committing legal malpractice?