Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Torts · MBE-tested
Knapp v. Schweitzer, Judge, Court of General Sessions, et al.
355 U.S. 804·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 189.
Knapp v. Schweitzer, Judge, Court of General Sessions, et al.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the Court of Appeals of New York. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is granted limited to question 2 presented by the jurisdictional statement which reads as follows:
“2. self incrimination.
“Whether an employer in an industry affecting commerce, called before a Grand Jury of the State as a witness in the course of an investigation concerning the state penal offenses of bribery, extortion and conspiracy connected with labor union operations, is privileged, by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, to decline to answer questions of such character that affirmative answers thereto would establish the corpus of the federal crime of unauthorized payment of moneys to an official of the labor union representing his employees, Taft-Hartley Act, Sec. 302 (29 U. S. C. 186; 61 Stat. 157) ; and whether his ensuing punishment for contempt by a State Court is not barred by the Supremacy Clause, Art. VI, Cl. 2 of the United States Constitution and also by the 'Privileges and Immunities’ Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Bernard H. Fitzpatrick for appellant. Frank S. Hogan and Charles W. Manning for appellees.