Act Of Production Privilege

19 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• In re Grand Jury Matter. Appeal of James Gilbert Brown
  768 F.2d 525· 3d Cir.· 1985-07-23 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the specific wording of the grand jury subpoena created testimonial incrimination beyond the mere act of production, thus protecting the custodian under the Fifth Amendment.
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Clinton Manges). Clinton Manges v. United States
  745 F.2d 1250· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-23 ·cited 22×
  The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not protect the contents of sole proprietorship business records, and the act of production by a bookkeeper who actively maintained the records does not compel the proprietor in a way that violates the privilege.
• Butcher v. Bailey
  753 F.2d 465· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-11 ·cited 18×
  A bankrupt debtor may assert a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the act of producing personal records if that production is testimonial and incriminating, but not for the contents of such records unless disclosure would break the heart of privacy.
• In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Issued TO Thirteen Corps. United States v. ROE
  775 F.2d 43· 2d Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a corporation, even if dissolved, cannot claim a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the production of its records, and a representative can be compelled to produce them.
• Rogers Transp., Inc. v. Honorable Herbert J. Stern
  763 F.2d 165· 3d Cir.· 1985-05-29 ·cited 12×
  The court vacated the district court's order and remanded for reconsideration because two employees were granted use immunity, potentially resolving the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination issue.
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings ON February 4 v. Terry
  759 F.2d 1418· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the contents of personal documents are not privileged under the Fifth Amendment absent compulsion, the act of producing those documents may be privileged if it constitutes testimonial self-incrimination, especially when transferred to an attorney for leg
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings Co.
  838 F.2d 624· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-10 ·cited 9×
  A corporation's custodian of records cannot assert a personal Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to avoid authenticating corporate documents, even in a one-person corporation.
• In re Sealed Case
  791 F.2d 179· D.C. Cir.· 1986-05-20 ·cited 8×
  A grant of use immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 is sufficient to compel production of documents, even if the act of production itself is incriminating, as the burden is on the government to prove any subsequent use of evidence is from an independent source.
• In re Sealed Case (government Records)
  950 F.2d 736· D.C. Cir.· 1991-11-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred by relying on an ex parte submission without examining the documents to determine if they were personal or government records, and that the act of producing government records is not protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege against s
• United States v. Wujkowski
  929 F.2d 981· 4th Cir.· 1991-04-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to conduct a thorough inquiry into whether subpoenaed documents were personal or corporate, and thus whether the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applied to their contents or the act of their production.
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of John DOE
  814 F.2d 190· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 6×
  A custodian of closely-held corporate records has no Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the act of producing those records, even if the corporation is essentially a sole proprietorship in practice.
• In re Three Grand Jury Subpoenas v. United States
  847 F.2d 1024· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-25 ·cited 5×
  A party claiming Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination cannot refuse to produce a document for in camera inspection by the court, as such production, if use-protected, is not incriminating. Entities cannot be held in contempt for failing to produce a document witho
• United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. First Jersey Sec., Inc.
  843 F.2d 74· 2d Cir.· 1988-03-24 ·cited 4×
  An individual corporate agent's act of producing corporate documents does not implicate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination if the existence and possession of the documents are a foregone conclusion and production adds little to the government's information.
• State v. Wellington Precious Metals, Inc.
  510 So. 2d 902· Fla.· 1987-07-16 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a sole shareholder-corporate custodian cannot assert a personal Fifth Amendment privilege to refuse production of corporate records when the subpoena is directed to the custodian in their representative corporate capacity rather than by persona
• Guede v. Windsor Cap. Mortg. Corp.
  18 So. 3d 1257· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-10-14 ·cited 1×
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena
  973 F.2d 45· 1st Cir.· 1992-08-31
  An individual involved in a Massachusetts nominee trust cannot assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to resist a grand jury subpoena for trust records because the trust is considered a collective entity.
• In re J.W.O. v. J.W.O.
  940 F.2d 1165· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-01
  The court held that the limited immunity granted under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 for the act of producing sole proprietorship business records adequately protects the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.