Holmes v. . Johnson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action on the case for malicious prosecution, and was one of a series of cases submitted by the parties to arbitration. It was in evidence that the defendant had sued out a warrant from a Justice of the Peace, charging the plaintiff with a larceny, but the warrant was not placed in the hands of an officer, and was no further proceeded on.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case for malicious prosecution, and was one of a series of cases submitted by the parties to arbitration. It was in evidence that the defendant had sued out a warrant from a Justice of the Peace, charging the plaintiff with a larceny, but the warrant was not placed in the hands of an officer, and was no further proceeded on. On this state of the facts, the arbitrators were of opinion that the action could not be maintained, and for this reason awarded judgment for the defendant. At the last Fall Term of Sampson Superior Court, his Honor, Judge Caldwell, presiding,…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
It is stated in an elementary work of high authority, 3 Step. N. P. 22T4, that “ the foundation of an action for a malicious prosecution is the malice of the defendant, either expressed or implied; and whatever engines of the law malice may employ to compass its evil designs against innocent and un-offending persons, whether in the shape of indictment or information, which charge a party with crimes injurious to his fame and reprrtation, and tend to deprive him of his liberty; or whether such malice be evinced by malicious arrests, or by exhibiting groundless accusations, merely with a view…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Olson v. HaggertyWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Betts v. . FranklinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1838