Legal Opinion
Dickerson v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Affiliated
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided January 17, 1994No. 23992PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Toal, Justice:
Pursuant to Rule 228, SCACR, we agreed to answer the question certified to this Court by order of Charles K. McCotter, Jr., United States Magistrate for the Western District of North Carolina:
Whether S.C. Code Ann. § 39-3-40 (1985) precludes prosecution by the State of South Carolina of a witness compelled to testify in a civil action brought in the United State District Court under S.C. Code Ann. § 39-3-10 and § 39-3-30.
Section 39-3-40 is a part of South Carolina’s antitrust act. It provides:
[a]ny person may be compelled to testify in any action or prosecution under §§ 39-3-10…
2Cases cited7 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
- Berkebile v. OutenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
- State v. ThriftSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
- Citizens for Lee County, Inc. v. Lee CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Singletary v. South Carolina Department of EducationCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1994
- State v. BrewerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002