Lipari v. Volume Shoe Corp.
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
KENNEDY, Judge.
Catherine Lipari had a jury verdict against Volume Shoe Corporation for $13,-000 actual damages and $74,000 punitive damages in a claim for malicious prosecution growing out of a shoplifting charge made by Volume Shoe against Mrs. Lipari. From the ensuing judgment Volume Shoe has appealed.
I
Volume Shoe in its first and second points contends that Mrs. Lipari made no submissive case for malicious prosecution in that the evidence did not show prima facie that Volume Shoe instigated the shoplifting prosecution.
The distinction drawn by defendant is between a case where the victim of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hoene v. Associated Dry Goods CorporationSupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
- Labrier v. Anheuser Ford, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1981
- Carp v. Queen InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Smith v. Allied Supermarkets, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1975
- Palermo v. CottomMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Fust v. FrancoisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995
- State Ex Rel. Dean v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Missouri · 2006
- Bogan v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
- Perry v. Dayton Hudson Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1990
- James L. Williams v. ryder/p.i.e. Nationwide, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.