State Ex Rel. Heidelberg v. Holden
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
NANCY STEFFEN RAHMEYER, Chief Judge.
Charles Heidelberg and Sandra Heidelberg (collectively, “Relators”) seek this court’s writ of prohibition to prevent The Honorable Calvin R. Holden (“Respondent”) from compelling them to respond to post-judgment discovery and to testify and produce documents at a judgment debtor’s examination. Relators have asserted their privilege against self-incrimination as secured by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and by Article I, § 19 of the Missouri Constitution. We
issued our preliminary writ, which we now make absolute.
Prohibition is a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York HarborSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- United States v. MandujanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- State Ex Rel. Linthicum v. CalvinSupreme Court of Missouri · 2001
- State Ex Rel. Munn v. McKelveySupreme Court of Missouri · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sarah Tupper, Respondents/Cross-Appellants v. City of St. Louis, Appellants/Cross-Respondents.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2015
- State ex rel. Nothum v. WalshSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012
- State Ex Rel. Nothum v. KintzMissouri Court of Appeals · 2011
- Sarah Tupper, Respondents/Cross-Appellants v. City of St. Louis, Appellants/Cross-Respondents.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2015
- State ex rel. Nothum v. WalshSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012