NEWMAN
v.
UNITED STATES; GLEESON ET UX. V. CARR, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY; MASTERCRAFTERS CLOCK & RADIO CO. V. VACHERON & CONSTANTIN-LE COULTRE WATCHES, INC.; PIERCE V. HEWLETT-PACKARD CO. ET AL.; PIERCE V. AMERICAN COMMUNICATIONS CO., INC.
NEWMAN
UNITED STATES; GLEESON ET UX. V. CARR, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY; MASTERCRAFTERS CLOCK & RADIO CO. V. VACHERON & CONSTANTIN-LE COULTRE WATCHES, INC.; PIERCE V. HEWLETT-PACKARD CO. ET AL.; PIERCE V. AMERICAN COMMUNICATIONS CO., INC.
350 U.S. 897
Supreme Court of the United States (1955)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Luxenberg, 374 F.2d 241 (6th Cir. 1967)…estified before a grand jury without being so advised, does not furnish a basis for dismissing an indictment subsequently returned against such individual based, in part, upon his testimony. United States v. Scully, 225 F. 2d 113 (C.A.2), cert. den. 350 U.S. 897, 76 S.Ct. 156, 100 L.Ed. 788. It is the duty and right of such witness to invoke the privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions. The stipulated facts in this ease demonstrates that this assignment of error is without merit.…
-
United States v. Matles, 247 F.2d 378 (2d Cir. 1957)…certain questions incriminatory and the jury may consider his refusals to answer as the equivalent of damaging answers. See 8 Wigmore § 2268 (3d ed. 1940); United States v. Scully, 2 Cir., 1955, 225 F. 2d 113, 115-116, certiorari denied [*383] 1955, 350 U.S. 897, 76 S.Ct. 156, 100 L. Ed. 788; Grünewald v. United States, 77 S.Ct. 963. But no such prejudice attaches to the refusal to answer questions at an examination before trial in a civil case. The fact that denaturalization cases are tried by the court a…