Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Lefkowitz Vs. Cunningham

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 13, 1977

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

59 entries 10 linked 49 unlinked
Show
  1. Lefkowitz Vs. Turley US Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1973
  2. Williams Vs. Rhodes US Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1968
  3. Baxter Vs. Palmigiano US Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1976
  4. Nixon Vs. Condon US Supreme Court · May 02, 1932
  5. Gardner Vs. Broderick US Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1968
  6. Sugarman Vs. Dougall US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1973
  7. United Public Workers Vs. Mitchell US Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1947
  8. Malloy Vs. Hogan US Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1964
  9. Kusper Vs. Pontikes US Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1973
  10. Meyer Vs. Nebraska US Supreme Court · Jun 04, 1923
  11. U.S. 801 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Lefkowitz v. Cunningham
    Search
  12. U.S. 801 (1977) Lefkowitz v. Cunningham
    Search
  13. his motion was denied. In re Cunningham v. Nadjari
    Search
  14. forced to give testimony which may later be used to convict them in a criminal proceeding. See, e.g., United States v. Washington
    Search
  15. privilege is available to a witness in a civil proceeding, as well as to a defendant in a criminal prosecution. Malloy v. Hogan
    Search
  16. of the Fifth Amendment and cannot be used against the declarant in a subsequent criminal prosecution. In Garrity v. New
    Search
  17. a witness elects to exercise his Fifth Amendment right not to give incriminating testimony against himself. In Gardner v. Broderick
    Search
  18. Id. at 392 U. S. 279 . Accord, Sanitation Men v. Sanitation
    Search
  19. supra at 392 U. S. 278 -279. We affirmed the teaching of Gardner more recently in Lefkowitz v. Turley
    Search
  20. one constitutionally protected right as the Page 431 U. S. 808 price for exercising another. See Simmons v. United
    Search
  21. of First Amendment freedom which this Court has consistently found entitled to constitutional protection. Kusper v. Pontikes
    Search
  22. notion that citizens may be forced to incriminate themselves because it serves a governmental need. E.g., Lefkowitz v. Turley
    Search
  23. on a waiver of the more limited use immunity which we have held essential to protect Fifth Amendment rights. Kastigar v. United
    Search
  24. Piccirillo v. New
    Search
  25. York, 400 U. S. 548 , 400 U. S. 562 (1971) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting). See also Kastigar v. United
    Search
  26. on a jury trial may increase the cost of defense. The right to send one's children to a private school, Meyer v. Nebraska
    Search
  27. Scott v. Philadelphia
    Search
  28. Mitchell v. Chester
    Search
  29. the distinction between policymaking and nonpolicymaking state employees, Indiana State Employees Assn., Inc. v. Negley
    Search
  30. Adams v. Walker
    Search
  31. Illinois State Employees Union, Council v. Lewis
    Search
  32. Gould v. Walker
    Search
  33. F.Supp. 421 (ND Ill.1973). See Pickering v. Board
    Search
  34. See Orloff v. Willoughby
    Search
  35. Napolitano v. Ward
    Search
  36. Sanitation Men v. Sanitation
    Search
  37. Garrity v. New
    Search
  38. Cf. Elrod v. Burns
    Search
  39. Myers v. United
    Search
  40. Indiana State Employees Assn., Inc. v. Negley
    Search
  41. Mow Sun Wong v. Hampton
    Search
  42. Leonard v. Douglas
    Search
  43. See Buckley v. Valeo
    Search
  44. to tender immunity was the critical missing element which invalidated the discharges of the policeman in Gardner v. Broderick
    Search
  45. U. S. 273 , and the sanitation men in Sanitation Men v. Sanitation
    Search
  46. immunity with respect to the use of his answers or the fruits thereof in a criminal prosecution of himself, Garrity v. New
    Search
  47. supra at 392 U. S. 278 . I recognize that Gardner v. Broderick
    Search
  48. and Garrity v. New
    Search
  49. U.S. Supreme Court Lefkowitz v. Cunningham
    Search
  50. Cunningham v. Nadjari
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial