Swetland v. Miles

Citations

• 101 Ohio St. (N.S.) 501

Syllabus

<p>Statutory construction — Evidence — Competency of witnesses— Privileged communications — Exceptions—Attorney and client —•Contest of will — Conversation between testator and attorney inadmissible, when — Sections II493, 1:14-94 o,nd 11493, General Code.</p> <p>1. Where there is no real room for doubt as to the meaning of a statute, there is no right to construe such statute.</p> <p>2. Section 11494, General Code, clearly and conclusively disqualifies an attorney from testifying “concerning a communication made to him by his client in that relation-, or his advice to his client.”</p> <p>3. This language is all comprehensive and unlimited as to such communications, and the statute provides the only two exceptions to the rule: 1. “By express consent of the client.” 2. “If the client * * * voluntarily testifies.” An action to contest the validity of the will of a client does not nullify or constitute an exception to this statutory rule.</p> <p>4. Sections 11493, 11494 and 11495, General Code, relate to the same subject-matter —the competency and incompetency of persons as witnesses, and the competency and incompetency of certain testimony. The legislature is presumed to have had the whole subject before it in drafting these three statutes,¶ as shown by the express reference to these several statutes in Section 11495. Section 11495 expressly excludes “proceedings involving the validity of a deed, will, or codicil.” The judicial branch of the government is not warranted in adding said clause to Section 11494, as the legislature did to Section 11495.</p>