Harkrader v. Moore
California Supreme Court
The fourth instruction mentioned in the opinion was as follows: “That if the defendant wrongfully, and without reasonable and probable cause, made the charge against the plaintiff, then the charge was malicious without proof that it was dictated by angry feelings or vindictive motives.” The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:
This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged' malicious prosecution of the plaintiff by the defendant, who, upon his affidavit made before a Justice of the Peace, charging the plaintiff with having stolen a parcel of fence rails of the alleged value of one hundred dollars, obtained from the Justice a warrant for the arrest of the plaintiff, upon which warrant the latter was arrested and imprisoned, but subsequently, upon being examined before the Justice, it appearing that there was no sufficient cause to believe him guilty,. he was discharged from…
2Cited by32 opinions
- Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & OlikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- People v. KilvingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Ball v. RawlesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Franzen v. ShenkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.