11 U.S.C. § 344

Self-incrimination; immunity

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 11 CasesGoogle Scholar

Immunity for persons required to submit to examination, to testify, or to provide information in a case under this title may be granted under part V of title 18.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases, 1979–2018 · leading case: In Re Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, Debtor. Anthony R. Martin-Trigona v. Richard Belford, Tr., & Daniel Meister, Tr., 732 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1984).
In Re Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, Debtor. Anthony R. Martin-Trigona v. Richard Belford, Tr., & Daniel Meister, Tr., 732 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1984). · cites it 6× “As a result, Judge Cabranes held appellant in civil contempt and ordered him incarcerated until he was prepared to testify in full.”
In Re Connelly, 59 B.R. 421 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1986). · cites it 4× “By letter dated April 5, 1984, Connelly’s attorneys advised the United States Trustee that he would exercise his rights under the Fifth Amendment, and would not testify, submit to examination, or provide information, until granted immunity as provided by Title 11 U.S.C. § 344…”
United States v. E.A. Gregory, Vonna Jo Gregory, G.W. Atkinson & Robert T. Spurlock, Jr., 730 F.2d 692 (11th Cir. 1984). · cites it 2× “11 U.S.C.A. § 344 , formerly 11 U.S.C.A. § 25 (a)(10).”
Jacob F. Butcher, Debtor-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. John H. Bailey, Iii, Tr., Tr. in Bankr.-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, 753 F.2d 465 (6th Cir. 1985). · cites it 2× “11 U.S.C. § 344 authorizes the granting of immunity pursuant to 18 U.”
Olson v. Potter (In Re Potter), 88 B.R. 843 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1988). · cites it 2× “11 U.S.C. § 344 . A claim of Fifth Amendment privilege is well taken where the witness can demonstrate any possibility of prosecution which is more than fanciful.”
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Morris D. ENGLISH, Jr., Defendant-Appellant, 92 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 1996). · cites it 2× “English also contends that the government improperly introduced English’s immunized testimony from prior bankruptcy proceedings into his criminal trial in violation of 11 U.S.C. § 344 . However, English's bankruptcy testimony was never immunized.”
In Re Krisle, 54 B.R. 330 (Bankr. D.S.D. 1985). · cites it 4× “Attorney Carlon requested that his client be granted immunity pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 344 . The Court, after confirming that Mr.”
Turner v. Wlodarski (In Re Minton Grp., Inc.), 43 B.R. 705 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1984). · cites it 3× “IMMUNITY UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 344 The request for immunity submitted by the debtor, Walter Wlodarski, is procedurally flawed and may not be granted by this court.”
Siu v. Martinez (In re Martinez), 500 B.R. 608 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2013). · cites it 3× “The Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 344 , contemplates that this privilege can also be invoked in bankruptcy cases and adversary proceedings.”
In Re Hulon, 92 B.R. 670 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1988). · cites it 2× “Furthermore, the motion requested that the court grant sanctions against the debt- or for necessitating actions by the trustee to compel the debtor’s testimony.”
United States v. Jerome G. Beery, 678 F.2d 856 (10th Cir. 1982). “The procedure is now set forth in 11 U.S.C.A. § 344 (1979). This section carries 18 U.”
United States v. Stelweck (In Re Stelweck), 86 B.R. 833 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988). “Moreover, if the Plaintiff wished the Defendants to answer its questions, it could have requested a grant of use immunity pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 344 . Absent convincing independent evidence of fraud under § 523(a)(2)(A), we will decline to infer same simply from the Defendants’…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.