Mattingly v. Whelden
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
SHIELDS, Judge.
Thomas Michael Mattingly appeals the trial court’s judgment against him and for George T. Whelden, Jr. and Larry A. Robertson.
We remand the judgment for clarification, but otherwise affirm.
' Mattingly filed a complaint for malicious prosecution against Wheldon and Robertson based upon an underlying cause brought by Robertson, represented by his attorney, Whelden, against Mattingly. The Hancock Superior Court entered judgment for Mat-tingly and against Robertson on the underlying cause for replevin on November 26, 1979. However, on the same date the malicious prosecution action…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Austin Joseph Ryan v. United States Lines CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- Gurvan B. Brown v. Pennsylvania Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- National Labor Relations Board v. Jacob E. Decker and SonsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Powers v. EllisIndiana Supreme Court · 1952
- City of Fort Wayne v. HamiltonIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- One Thousand Fleet Ltd. Partnership v. GuerrieroCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- Tapia v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
- Moran v. KlatzkeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- ITT Hartford Insurance Group v. TrowbridgeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
- State ex rel. Huppert v. PaschkeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1994