Shields v. Pflanz
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 69 — PETITION ORDINARY 1. There is a malicious abuse of the process in the officer’s hands, ' where he employs it wrongfully and unlawfully, and not for the purpose it is intended by the law to effect.
Read the full summary
Case 69 — PETITION ORDINARY 1. There is a malicious abuse of the process in the officer’s hands, ' where he employs it wrongfully and unlawfully, and not for the purpose it is intended by the law to effect. Barret v. White, 3 N. H., 14; Wood v. Graves, 144 Mass., 366; Breek v. Blanchard, 20 N. H., 328; Ross v. Filbraick, 39 Mo., 29; Slaughter v. Mott, 25 Ver., 668; Cooley on Torts, Star p. 395, top p. 433; Bishop’s Non-contract Law, p. 84, sec. 210; Firestone v. Rice, 48 N. W., 887; Cochran v. Toher, 14 Minn., 385; Beaverst v. State, 4 Texas Appeals, 175; State v. Muhorn, 3 Harrington, 368;…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE GUPPY
DELIVERED THE OPINION. OE THE COURT.
The appellant, Shields, instituted this action in the Jefferson Circuit Court, (Law & Equity Division), against the appellee, Pfianz, seeking to recover damages for injuries and wrongs inflicted upon him by Phil. Donahue, deputy sheriff, while appellant was under arrest and in the custody of said deputy. The petition reads as follows:
The plaintiff, Geo. W. Shields, states that on the 7th day of March, 1895, one J. W. Thomas a justice of the peace in and for the county of Nelson and State of Kentucky, issued a warrant against him for criminal…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Jones v. Van BeverCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
- Johnson v. Williams' Admr.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1901
- Growbarger v. U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
- Martin v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
- State ex rel. Hill v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1952
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.