R v Withers and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 February 1811 |
| Date | 20 February 1811 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1258
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Distinguished, Ramsbotham v. Senior, 1869, L R 8 Eq 575
1268 BEX V. WITHERS 2 CAMP. 678. [578] Wednesday, Feb. 20, 1811. rex v withers and others (An attorney is not at liberty to disclose in evidence what has been confidentially communicated to him by a client, although the latter be no party to the cause before the Court.) [Distinguished, Ramsbotham v. Senior, 1869, L R 8 Eq 575 ] This was an indictment for breaking open the house of one Copland, the prosecutor, and assaulting and imprisoning his person. On the part of the defendants, Mr Philhpsou, an attorney, was called to state that the same day the assault was committed the prosecutor consulted him professionally, and gave an account of the transaction materially at variance with his testimony in the witness-box , and that on the same occasion, a Mr Bruce who accompanied him, had in his hearing directed Mr Philhpson to bring an action of trespass against the defendants, for breaking and entering the house now represented to be the prosecutor's as the house of him Mr. Bruce It was objected that the whole that passed between Mr Phillipsou, and the prosecutor and Bruce, on this occasion, was privileged on the score of professional confidence Garrow, for the defendants, insisted, that at any rate the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Russell v Jackson
...(8 Beav.,22), Herring v. Globery (1 Ph. 91), Wheatky v. Williams (1 M. & W. 533), Doe v. Harris (5 Car.. & Pay. 592), Bex v. Withers (2 Camp. 578), Turquand.v. Knight (2 M. & W, 98); Taylor on Evidence, vol. 1, p. 627 ; Phillipps on Evidence, vol. 1, p. 171, 9th edik Against the motion to s......
-
Doe, on the demise of Pitt, v Hogg
...for conducting his cause, or gratis dictum. If it was not the former, the communication is admissible in evidence In Rex v. Withers, 2 Camp 578, it was ruled by Lord Eltenborough, that if a party who is assaulted go to an attorney to consult him on it, such attorney cannot be allowed to giv......
-
Beer v Ward
...; the solicitor cannot at any time divulge it, either against them, or in an action to which they are not parties. King v. Withers (2 Campb. 578). This secrecy being the duty of the solicitor, the Court will enforce it by the exercise of its preventive jurisdiction ; its general controul ov......