Heyman v. Kline

How later courts describe this case

• holding that in conducting review of a final administrative order, the Civil Service Board exercised quasijudicial functions, and that the exclusive remedy is by appeal pursuant to K.S.A. 60-2101(a) (Corriek) (now K.S.A.1981 Supp. 60-2101[d])
• stating that “[wjhile we agree that the presence of a third party commonly destroys the privilege, it does so only insofar as it is indicative of the intent of the parties that their communication not be confidential,” and presence of client’s father did not indicate such an intent
• Act bars federal court injunction issued in in personam proceeding involving employment contract
• custom and practice established when for five years clothes changing time not compensated
• hijacking plan included explicit agreement to cover up
• state civil-service board acts in quasi-judicial capacity