Legal Opinion

Bowen v. W. A. Pollard & Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 14, 1917PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Civil actioN, tried before Stacy, J., at January Term, 1917, of Pitt. This is an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, tbe evidence tending to prove tbe following facts: Tbe plaintiff was living on bis wife’s land in Pitt County, and went to Pollard & Co. to obtain advancements for tbe year 1910 to tbe amount of $400. In accordance witb tbe agreement made, Bowen executed a crop lien to Pollard & Co. on 25 January, 1910. About five weeks thereafter tbe…

Read the full summary

Civil actioN, tried before Stacy, J., at January Term, 1917, of Pitt. This is an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution, tbe evidence tending to prove tbe following facts: Tbe plaintiff was living on bis wife’s land in Pitt County, and went to Pollard & Co. to obtain advancements for tbe year 1910 to tbe amount of $400. In accordance witb tbe agreement made, Bowen executed a crop lien to Pollard & Co. on 25 January, 1910. About five weeks thereafter tbe defendant Pollard approached tbe plaintiff and requested, as tbe title to tbe land bad been found to be in plaintiff’s wife,…

1Opinion of the CourtAlleN, J.

The action is to recover damages for a malicious prosecution, and the burden is on the plaintiff to prove:(1) The institution and termination of a criminal charge against him.(2) That the prosecution was without probable cause.(3) That it was with malice.(4) That the defendants participated in the prosecution.

If, however, he has furnished evidence of these facts, giving to the evidence the most favorable construction for the plaintiff, as we are required to do on appeals from judgments of nonsuit, there is error.

It is not denied that a criminal prosecution was instituted against the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Stanford v. . Grocery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Wilkinson v. . WilkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  3. Smith v. . DeaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1857
  4. Beale v. . RobersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1847
  5. Vickers v. . Logan and HamptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Dickerson v. . Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Miller v. . GreenwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. Wehrle v. BrooksDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1966
  4. Taylor v. . HodgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. Dickerson v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API