Note 238 — CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT.
Reading edition
People v. Stout, 3 Park Cr. Rep., 670; Edington v. Mut. L. I. Co., 67 N. Y., 185. Cf. Kendall v. Grey, 2 Hilt., 300; Pearsall v. Elmer, 5 Redf., 181. A disposition to construe the statute strictly was disclosed in the opinion of Earl, J., in Edington. v. Ætna L. I. Co., 77 N. Y., 564, but his personal views were disapproved in subsequent cases; see Grattan v. Metro. L. I. Co., 80 N. Y., 281; Renihan v. Dennin, 103 N. Y., 573; Buffalo Loan, etc., Co. v. Knights Templar, etc., 126 N. Y., 450. See also Jones v. Brooklyn, etc., Ry. Co., 3 N. Y. Supp., 253; in matter of Darragh, 52 Hun, 591; Marx v. Manhattan Ry. Co., 56 Hun, 575; Treanor v. Manhattan Ry. Co., 28 Abb. N. C., 47.