EVIDENCE - PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

Authors

Abstract

In a suit for divorce on the ground of adultery, a Luthern clergyman refused to testify concerning a disclosure made to him in his religious capacity by the defendant husband, on the ground that it was a privileged communication under the Minnesota statute. The district court adjudged him in contempt of court. Upon certiorari to the supreme court of Minnesota, held, the communication was privileged, and the order was reversed. In re Swenson (Minn. 1931) 237 N.W. 589.

Recommended Citation

EVIDENCE - PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, 30 Mich. L. Rev. 309 (1931).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol30/iss2/26