Schondorf v. Griffith
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 170, April T., 1900, by defendant in a suit of B. Schondorf against W. A. Griffith and the C. F. Adams Company, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., June T., 1898, No. 117, on verdict for plaintiff Opinion by Beaver, J. Trespass for malicious prosecution. It appears from the evidence that plaintiff was arrested for larceny as defendant’s agent. A true bill was found but he was acquitted when the case was called for trial in the quarter sessions.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 170, April T., 1900, by defendant in a suit of B. Schondorf against W. A. Griffith and the C. F. Adams Company, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., June T., 1898, No. 117, on verdict for plaintiff Opinion by Beaver, J. Trespass for malicious prosecution. It appears from the evidence that plaintiff was arrested for larceny as defendant’s agent. A true bill was found but he was acquitted when the case was called for trial in the quarter sessions. There was evidence tending to show that certain moneys, with the theft of which he was charged, having been collected by him, had…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
The general principles which govern in actions for malicious prosecution have been so often laid down by this court (Ruffner v. Hooks, 2 Pa. Superior Ct. 278; Auer v. Mauser, 6 Pa. Superior Ct. 618; Fry v. Wolf, 8 Pa. Superior Ct. 468) that it is unnecessary to restate them here. There is no serious allegation that the court below departed from them in any essential particular. The assignments of error relate exclusively to minor details in the trial and charge which may be best disposed of by a brief reference to each seriatim.
If Cohen’s testimony as to the receipt from…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ruffner v. HooksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Auer v. MauserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Fry v. WolfSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- Evans v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928