Also known as: between husband and wife · inter spousal
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A Latin phrase describing relations, communications, or legal effects arising solely between a husband and wife. The phrase marks the marital unit as a distinct legal sphere in which privileges, immunities, and estates receive special treatment unavailable to non-spouses.
After the children slept, Lynne described testing shortcuts to Lucas in their living room with no one else present. The government subpoenaed Lucas for grand-jury testimony about those statements. Because the exchanges occurred only between the spouses, the court treated them as confidential communications protected from compelled disclosure.
After leaving the marital home in another state, the wife sued her husband for divorce and alimony. The husband argued the federal court lacked jurisdiction because the parties remained married. The court recognized the wife as a separate citizen for diversity purposes once the marriage relation had effectively ended.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
An employee injured at work sued his employer for negligence. His wife joined the suit seeking damages for loss of her husband's society and services. The court allowed the wife's claim because the injury affected rights arising directly between the spouses.
A wife injured in a car accident in California sued her husband in Wisconsin court. California law barred interspousal tort suits while Wisconsin permitted them. The court applied Wisconsin law because the forum's policy against interspousal immunity controlled the marital relationship.
A husband contracted to treat all future earnings as joint property with his wife. The IRS later assessed the full income against the husband alone. The court held that the husband could not shift tax liability on personal services by agreement between the spouses.
A wife agreed to testify voluntarily against her husband in a federal criminal trial. The husband moved to exclude her testimony under the spousal privilege. The court ruled that the testimonial privilege belongs only to the witness spouse, so she could choose to testify about non-confidential matters.
The privilege protects the content of confidential communications made between spouses during the marriage. A presumption of confidentiality applies, and the government bears the burden of rebutting it. The privilege is distinct from the spousal testimonial privilege.
Supporting sources
No. Only the portions made in the presence of third parties lose confidentiality. Private segments occurring solely between the spouses remain protected if the government cannot overcome the presumption of confidentiality for those segments.
Supporting sources
The witness spouse alone holds the privilege. The defendant spouse cannot prevent the witness from testifying voluntarily about non-confidential matters, though the marital communications privilege may still bar disclosure of confidential statements.
Supporting sources
…justice. It is essential to remember that the Hawkins privilege is not needed to protect information privately disclosed between husband and wife in the confidence of the marital relationship— once described by this Court as “the best solace of human existence.” Stein v. Bowman , 13 Pet., at 223. Those confidences are privileged…