identity of client privileged under circumstances where to reveal the client's name would disclose confidential communications
How later courts described this case
- identity of client privileged under circumstances where to reveal the client's name would disclose confidential communications
- identity of client privileged under cireumstances where to reveal the client's name would disclose confidential communications
- client’s identity would be privileged where so much has been divulged with regard to legal services rendered or the advice sought that to reveal client’s name would be to disclose whole relationship and confidential communications
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Dissenting Opinion
DeBruler, J.
— The majority, after having set forth prevailing legal thought and the legal standards applicable to deciding whether a communication is to be considered confidential by reason of the attorney-client privilege, does not permit its decision to be determined by such thoughts and standards as did the Court of Appeals. The attorney testified that the information at stake was imparted to him in an oral statement made by a client in the middle of an interview being conducted for the purpose of providing the client legal advice. The client believed that this information ‘Vas relevant to the primary discussion.” The lawyer believed that it was not a mere “volunteered aside,” and actually provided legal advice in response to it. Surely this satisfies every legal test espoused in the majority opinion for determining when a communication between client and lawyer shall be deemed a confidential communication.
Note. — Reported at 381 N.E.2d 866 .