Union Pacific Railroad v. Day ex rel. Day

Citations

• 68 Kan. 726
• 75 P. 1021
• 1904 Kan. LEXIS 166

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Evidence — Attorney and Client — Privileged Communication. Where a person communicated to an attorney facts in detail, and the communication became important as evidence against the person making it in an action subsequently commenced in which he was a party, and the attorney, without the consent of the person making such communication, was called by the adverse party as a witness to testify as to the communication so made, and the court excluded the testimony of the witness in reference thereto as being a privileged communication, hela, error, where it appears that the advice of the attorney was gratuitously given, '■ that it was not' known that the person consulted was an attorney, ■ and that the communication was not made under the seal of professional confidence.</p>