CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Privileges
......Self-Incrimination Privilege
.........Application: Potential for Crim. Prosectn
............Civil Proceeding
 12 Cards On This Topic:
  • Requirements for grant of use immunity in civil case.
  • DPD need not receive affirmative offer of criminal use immunity for his statements before he can be fired for disobeying employer's orders to answer questions re job performance.
  • D could not be questioned about matters tending to incriminate him at civil MDO hrg, but had to respond to nonincriminatory questioning about mental condition.
  • Distinction between use and transactional immunity.
  • DA's objection to grant of use immunity conclusive that immunity would or might unduly hamper criminal prosecution.
  • Trial court may frame protective order in civil case that will protect witness from having testimony used against him/her in criminal action.
  • Adverse inference may be drawn from a claim of the self-incrimination privilege in a civil case.
  • Civil witness (W) may not assert 5th Amend. priv. w/o showing likelihood of criminal prosecution; W failed to show compulsion, self-incrimination possibility or that privileged info sought.
  • Civil D may not invoke privilege during pretrial discovery then waive at trial.
  • Privilege may be asserted in civil case by Ds who may be subject to criminal sanctions; although no adverse inferences stem from claim at discovery, adverse inferences may be drawn at trial.
  • By filing insurance claim for fire loss when suspected of arson, P waived right to claim 5th Amend. in civil case; must either submit to deposition or dismiss claim.
  • Party seeking relief in civil case may not invoke privilege against self-incrimination on matters relevant to recovery.


    •