Thomas v. De Graffenreid
Supreme Court of South Carolina
*1441 This ^8,3 an action for a malicious prosecution, tried before Mr. Jus-J tice Nott, at Winnsborougli, August,* 1819. -The declaration, after setting forth the prosecution in the usual form, went on to state, “ That the said John Thomas was, in due course bf law, acquitted of the said premises, &c., whereupon the Judges of the said State, considered and adjudged that the said John should depart thence without day, in that behalf.
Read the full summary
*1441 This ^8,3 an action for a malicious prosecution, tried before Mr. Jus-J tice Nott, at Winnsborougli, August,* 1819. -The declaration, after setting forth the prosecution in the usual form, went on to state, “ That the said John Thomas was, in due course bf law, acquitted of the said premises, &c., whereupon the Judges of the said State, considered and adjudged that the said John should depart thence without day, in that behalf. And the said John was and is duly discharged of and from the premises, in the said indictment specified, as by the records and proceedings appears.” In support…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Uott, J.
It is essential to an action for a malicious prosecution, to show that the prosecution is at an end.1 2 Selwyn, 1060. It is a necessary allegation to be laid in the declaration, and must be proved as laid; otherwise a person might recover in the action, and still be afterwards convicted on the original prosecution. Doug 215.2 Fisher v. Bristow et al. The word acquitted is a word of technical import, and must be understood in its technical sense, to wit, an acquittal on trial by a jury. Morgan and Hughes, 2 D. & E. 225. Jones v. Givin, Gilbert's…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Joy Laskar, PH.D. v. Phillip W. HurdCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2020
- Harrelson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1922
- Potter v. CasterlineSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1879
- State v. ParkmanCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2005