Harriman v. Jones
Harriman v. Jones
Opinion of the Court
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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.