¶2But for one reservation, I concur. The reservation is that I would not agree that a civil defendant facing the prospect of indictment could be put to trial fairly in the civil case over his objection, even if he were not required to testify and even if the plaintiff were not allowed to argue the defendant's silence against him. Such a trial, even with these accommodations, would confront the defendant with the unfair dilemma of either waiving his right to testify in his own defense in the civil trial or waiving his right not to incriminate himself in the prospective criminal proceedings.
864 So. 2d 1064
Ex Parte Oliver
Decided May 9, 2003
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 2003-05-09
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2015
6 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2003-05-09
View the full empirical analysis of this case →