Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte Day

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 9, 1979No. 78-452Published

1Dissent

I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority of the court. The majority holds "that the testimony of the psychiatrist was `privileged'" under Code 1975, § 34-26-2. I would affirm the decision of the trial court, which interpreted the legislative intent to be that only psychologists were included in the privilege established by § 34-26-2 and not psychiatrists.

Code 1975, § 34-26-2, the statute which the instant case turns on, reads as follows:

For the purpose of this chapter, the confidential relations and communications between licensed psychologist and client are placed upon the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Adams v. MathisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1977
  2. Holloway v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  3. Department of Industrial Relations v. Little Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API