Harriman v. Jones
Opinion
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
58 N.H. 328 (Harriman v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.