Harriman v. Jones

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Harriman v. Jones

58 N.H. 328

DecidedJune 5, 1878

StatusPublished

This text of 58 N.H. 328 (Harriman v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harriman v. Jones, 58 N.H. 328 (N.H. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Doe, C. J.

The objection, that evidence is a disclosure of a privileged communication between attorney and client, is founded on proof of the fact that the relation of attorney and client existed. The existence of that relation is not a privileged communication. Proof of the relation is competent for such a purpose as that for which the evidence in this case was received. Brown v. Payson, 6 N. H. 443; 1 Greenl. Ev., s. 245.

The letters were as competent as if written by the testator, or by some other agent than the defendant. The statute, which excludes the testimony of the defendant in a suit brought by an executor, does not exclude the letters of the testator, by whosesoever hand he may have written them.

Judgment on the verdict.

Poster and Bingham, JJ., did not sit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Doe, C. J.

The objection, that evidence is a disclosure of a privileged communication between attorney and client, is founded on proof of the fact that the relation of attorney and client existed. The existence of that relation is not a privileged communication. Proof of the relation is competent for such a purpose as that for which the evidence in this case was received. Brown v. Payson, 6 N. H. 443; 1 Greenl. Ev., s. 245.

The letters were as competent as if written by the testator, or by some other agent than the defendant. The statute, which excludes the testimony of the defendant in a suit brought by an executor, does not exclude the letters of the testator, by whosesoever hand he may have written them.

Judgment on the verdict.

Poster and Bingham, JJ., did not sit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 N.H. 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harriman-v-jones-nh-1878.