Legal Opinion · Dissent

State ex rel. Nothum v. Walsh

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided July 31, 2012No. SC 92268Published

1DissentZel M. Fischer, Judge

The majority opinion holds that § 513.380, RSMo 2000, provides only “use immunity” and that “there is no evidence that the Missouri legislature intended by its use to convert the statute’s express grant of authority to provide use immunity into an implied grant of authority to provide transactional immunity,” “nor does the statute use the language other state and federal statutes utilize in providing for derivative use immunity.” Op. at 565-66, 569.

I respectfully dissent because I would look at every word in the sentence defining the immunity to determine the scope of the immunity the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Zicarelli v. New Jersey State Commission of InvestigationSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. State v. OliverSupreme Court of Missouri · 2009
  4. Teefey v. TeefeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
  5. People v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API