2017 Missouri Revised Statutes
Title XXXV CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATIONS
Chapter 513 Executions and Exemptions
Section 513.380 Examination of judgment debtor, when, procedure — grant of use immunity.

Effective 28 Aug 1993

Title XXXV CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATIONS

513.380. Examination of judgment debtor, when, procedure — grant of use immunity. — 1. Whenever an execution against the property of any judgment debtor, individual or corporate, issued from any court in this state, shall be returned unsatisfied, in whole or in part, by any sheriff or other proper officer, the judgment creditor in such execution, his executor, administrator or assign, may, at any time within five years after such return so made, be entitled to an order by the court rendering such judgment, requiring the judgment debtor or, in the case of a corporate judgment debtor, its chief officer to appear before such court at a time and place in said order to be named, to undergo an examination under oath touching his ability and means to satisfy said judgment, and in case of neglect or refusal on the part of such judgment debtor or, in the case of a corporate debtor, its chief officer to obey such order, such court is hereby authorized to issue a writ of attachment against said debtor, as now provided by law, and to punish him or, in the case of a corporate debtor, its chief officer for contempt.

2. Any prosecuting attorney or circuit attorney may grant use immunity from prosecution to a judgment debtor for any statement made at a judgment debtor's examination conducted pursuant to subsection 1 of this section. Such use immunity from prosecution shall protect such person from prosecution for any offense related to the content of the statements made.

(RSMo 1939 § 1391, A.L. 1959 H.B. 372, A.L. 1978 H.B. 1634, A.L. 1993 S.B. 180)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 1227; 1919 § 1679; 1909 § 2248

(2012) In judgment debtor's examination conducted under section, provision of use immunity did not include derivative use immunity and thus was not coextensive with the parties' constitutional privilege against self-incrimination; trial court order compelling their testimony was an abuse of discretion. State ex rel. Nothum v. Walsh, 380 S.W.3d 557 (Mo.banc).