Legal Opinion

Langford v. Boston & Albany Railroad

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 9, 1887PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.

The first count of the plaintiff’s declaration is, in substance, a count for malicious prosecution; and it cannot be maintained, because the evidence fails to show such a termination of the prosecution alleged to be malicious as will entitle the plaintiff to maintain this action. The entry of nolle prosequi by the district attorney of his own motion, followed by a discharge of the accused party by the court, may be such a termination of the prosecution as will enable the party to maintain an action for malicious prosecution. Graves v. Dawson, 133 Mass. 419. But our cases uniformly hold that,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Coupal v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
  2. Graves v. DawsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
  3. Graves v. DawsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Halberstadt v. . New York Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. Glidewell v. Murray-Lacy & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1919
  3. White v. International Text Book Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  4. Ronald Lee Tucker v. Dewey Duncan and Tom RasmussenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1974
  5. Rush v. BuckleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905

44 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