Legal Opinion

Miller v. Martin

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Decided February 23, 1929PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPortrttm, J.

This is an action for malicious prosecution. The declaration alleges, on or about January 6, 1928, the defendant, H, C. Martin wrongfully and maliciously procured a warrant, falsely charging the plaintiff with the crime of removing an automobile, purchased from the defendant under a conditional sales contract, from the State of Tennessee, without the written consent of the defendant and in violation of the conditional sales statute. It also charges that as a consequence of the issuance of this warrant, the plaintiff was arrested in Houston, Texas, and incarcerated in jail and held for a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. D. B. Loveman Co. v. BaylessTennessee Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Mauldin v. BallTennessee Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Sadek v. Nashville Recycling Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1988
  2. Lantroop v. MorelandCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1992
  3. Martin v. WahlCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1933
  4. Sadek v. Nashville Recycling Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API