Meyer v. Clark
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an order. • The action was for false imprisonment. The complaint, setting forth the cause of action, was accompanied by the following affidavit of the plaintiff: “That while this plaintiff was quietly and peaceably attending to his business in his store, the defendant Burns entered the same, and after remaining a short time, demanded that this deponent should go with him to see the captain of the police force of the thirty-third police precinct, which deponent…
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order. • The action was for false imprisonment. The complaint, setting forth the cause of action, was accompanied by the following affidavit of the plaintiff: “That while this plaintiff was quietly and peaceably attending to his business in his store, the defendant Burns entered the same, and after remaining a short time, demanded that this deponent should go with him to see the captain of the police force of the thirty-third police precinct, which deponent refused to do, and that said Burns without any power or authority continued to demand and insist that this deponent should…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Monell, Ch. J.
This action is . for false imprisonment,, and not, as seems to have been supposed by the appellants’ counsel, for a malicious *111prosecution. The question of probable cause, therefore, is not involved (Burns v. Erben, 1 Robt. 555; affirmed, 40 N. Y. R. 463), and the complaint and affidavit of the plaintiff sufficiently show a cause of action and ground of arrest.
The cause of the arrest was an alleged violation of the excise, law of the State ; "and the arrest was made by the defendants, as policemen of the city, acting under the orders of the captain of the precinct.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Holley v. MixNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Slater v. WoodThe Superior Court of New York City · 1861