The following excerpt is from Asherman v. Meachum, 932 F.2d 137 (2nd Cir. 1991):
There are nonetheless two sets of circumstances where the state may require testimony that might be incriminatory or may draw an adverse inference from the witness' refusal to testify. One is in a civil proceeding where the state provides immunity from prosecution, see Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 316-17, 96 S.Ct. 1551, 1557-58, 47 L.Ed.2d 810 (1976); the other is where the witness' "silence in and of itself is insufficient to support an adverse decision [in the civil proceeding]." Id. at 317, 96 S.Ct. at 1557. In both situations the witness is not faced with the dilemma of either testifying--thereby risking criminal prosecution--or being penalized solely for asserting his constitutional privilege.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.