Booraem v. Potter Hotel Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County. Frank F. Oster, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This action was prosecuted against the defendant to obtain damages for malicious prosecution. At the conclusion of the taking of plaintiff’s testimony defendant moved for a nonsuit upon several grounds. The court granted the motion and from the judgment which followed, plaintiff appeals.' As we think the court was correct in granting the nonsuit upon the ground that plaintiff had failed to prove a want of probable cause, no other of the grounds need be considered.
The law touching the question is both simple and settled. It is incumbent upon the plaintiff, and the burden of proof is upon him…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ball v. RawlesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Davis v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by14 opinions
- Franzen v. ShenkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Richter v. NeilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Haydel v. MortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Lee v. LevisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Moore v. DurrerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.