Hibbing v. Hyde
WILLIAM HIBBING v. MOSES H. HYDE
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- E. W. McKinstry (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — McKinstry
By the Court, McKinstry, J.:
The plaintiff alleges in his complaint that the defendant maliciously, and without probable cause, charged the plaintiff, before a justice of the peace, with having committed the crime of malicious mischief. Plaintiff also alleges that he was tried and found guilty of the crime charged; and this averment he succeeded in proving at the trial of the present action.
In an action for malicious prosecution of a criminal charge, the plaintiff must prove that the prosecution, alleged to have been malicious, has terminated by his acquittal. (Rhodes v. Silvers, 1 Harr. 127; 2 Greenl. Evidence, 252; 1 Hill on Torts, 416; Hilliard, Remedies for Torts, 385.)
Judgment and order affirmed.
Cited by
- Dowdell v. Carpy S.F. No. 1273. · 1900-07-18
- Carpenter v. Nutter Sac. No. 548. · 1899-11-27