Legal Opinion
Sebring v. Aken
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 4, 1932PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
An action of malicious prosecution may not be founded on an ordinary civil action unless the liberty or property of the plaintiff was interfered with by some legal process. The proceeding described in the complaint was a civil proceeding to punish for a criminal contempt. (Eastern C. S. Co. v. B. & M. P. I. U., Local No. 45, 200 App. Div. 714; People ex rel. Stearns v. Marr, 181 N. Y. 463; People ex rel. Negus v. Dwyer, 90 id. 402; Matter of Hanbury, 160 App. Div. 662.) Still it closely resembles a criminal proceeding. It was instituted for a purpose similar to that underlying a criminal…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Stearns v. . MarrNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Sachs v. WeinsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
- Eastern Concrete Steel Co. v. Bricklayers' & Mason Plasterers' International Union, Local No. 45Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- In re HanburyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
3Cited by4 opinions
- Black v. JudelsohnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Watson v. City of New YorkCivil Court of the City of New York · 1968
- Schulman v. Modern Industrial BankNew York Supreme Court · 1942
- Serxner v. ElgartNew York Supreme Court · 1949