Thompson v. Schuster
Supreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota
Appeal from the district court of Lake county. The facts are stated in the opinion. The absence of probable cause was fully established, and that together with the facts that the attachment was unlawfully and wantonly sued out and that the debt was not due, that the affidavit for an attachment on its face showed there was no ground for an attachment, and the oppressiveness of the whole attachment proceedings was sufficient evidence on which to send the case to the jury to…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the district court of Lake county. The facts are stated in the opinion. The absence of probable cause was fully established, and that together with the facts that the attachment was unlawfully and wantonly sued out and that the debt was not due, that the affidavit for an attachment on its face showed there was no ground for an attachment, and the oppressiveness of the whole attachment proceedings was sufficient evidence on which to send the case to the jury to find whether or not there was any malice on the part of the respondents in suing out the attachment, and the court erred…
1Opinion of the Court
■ William E. Church, J.
This was an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution. It appears by the record that the plaintiffs had become indebted to the defendants, A. N. Schuster & Co., in the sum of §1,291.25, for goods sold, of which they had paid §100; that §200 more was due; and that the balance of §1,291.25 had not yet matured. An attachment was taken out for the whole §1,291.25, and levied upon a stock of goods, merchandise, books, and accounts of the plaintiff, thereby stopping their business, and causing them much damage. The attachment was subsequently dissolved on the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. RobertsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Mattes v. EngelSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1902
- Peabody v. Lloyds BankersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896