Curran v. Pasek

Supreme Court of Wyoming · Evidence

Evidenceconfidential marital communicationsspousal privilegeevidenceprivilegemarital communicationsspousal immunityintentions test

Facts

The plaintiff sued Dr. McDonald's estate for malpractice arising from treatment she allegedly received after a car accident. After Dr. McDonald later committed suicide, a deputy sheriff investigating the death spoke with his wife, who said he was a frequent marijuana user. The plaintiff subpoenaed the wife for a deposition and sought to use her statements at trial as evidence of Dr. McDonald's negligence. The estate objected on the ground that the information was protected by the confidential marital communication privilege.

Issue

Does Wyoming's confidential marital communication privilege survive the death of a spouse, who holds that privilege, and who may waive it? The court also addressed how to determine whether conduct counts as a confidential marital communication.

Rule

In Wyoming, the confidential marital communication privilege protects communications made during marriage and in confidence, and confidentiality is lost if the communication is revealed in the presence of a third party. The privilege survives the death of either spouse, is available to either spouse, and conduct qualifies as a confidential marital communication only if it was intended to communicate a confidential message to the other spouse under the intentions test. The spouse against whom the confidential communication is offered must waive the privilege before the witness spouse may testify about it; only after that waiver may the non-party spouse choose whether to invoke or waive spousal immunity.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a wrongful-death suit filed in Cheyenne, the plaintiff seeks to depose Elena Ruiz about a private conversation she had with her husband, Victor, while they were married. Victor later died, and his estate is now the defendant. The estate objects that the statement was a confidential marital communication.

Under Wyoming law as stated by the majority, how should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that the confidential marital communications privilege survives the death of either spouse. The reason is that the privilege exists to encourage confidential communication within marriage, and that purpose would be undermined if confidentiality vanished at death. Because the communication was private, made during marriage, and offered against the deceased spouse's estate, the privilege remains available. (Derived from Curran v. Pasek (n.d.).)