Legal Opinion

Foley v. Poschke

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 5, 1941No. 28078PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

Section 11494, General Code, says explicitly that an attorney shall not testify concerning a communication made to him by his client in that relation, or his advice to his client, unless the client gives express consent. However, when the client voluntarily testifies, the attorney may be compelled to testify on the same subject.

An examination of the record herein discloses that while Mr. Spooner testified to some matters which cannot be properly classed as privileged, he also testified as to matters which were of a confidential nature and concerning which the defendant had not…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dickerson v. DickersonIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Bowers v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. PostOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. BrunsonOhio Supreme Court · 2022
  3. Collins v. UtleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1947
  4. Emley, Exr. v. SelepchakOhio Court of Appeals · 1945
  5. 12312 Mayfield Rd., L.L.C. v. High & Low Little Italy, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API