Within certain limitations, the law immunizes confidential communications made to an attorney, spouse or physician from compulsory disclosure at subsequent judicial proceedings. Frequently, as in the above hypothetical situations, the subject matter of a communication is voluntarily disclosed to a third person for transmittal to the ultimately intended recipient. The third person may be the agent of either of the primary parties. Does this disclosure remove it from the privileged classification, notwithstanding the fact that the parties may still have intended the information to be confidential? It is the purpose of this comment, first, to examine the extent to which the three common privileges have been extended to communications through, by, or in the presence of agents, and, second, to identify some of the probable factors motivating such extension. For the most part, the decisions have taken a rational and practical approach, but seldom indulge in any extended discussion of the reasoning behind them.

Included in

Evidence Commons