Wainauskis v. Howard Johnson Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
McEWEN, Judge:
Howard Johnson Company [hereinafter appellant] appeals from the $100,000 judgment entered against it in this malicious prosecution action following denial of its motions for judgment n.o.v. and new trial. We affirm.
Appellee, Rose Mary Wainauskis, filed a complaint against appellant, her former employer, setting forth four causes of action, specifically, claims for malicious abuse of process, wrongful discharge, slander and intentional infliction of emotional distress. When appellee had concluded the presentation of the liability portion of her case, the distinguished Judge S.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Burrell v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- Burbage v. Boiler Engineering & Supply Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Baldino v. CastagnaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Byers v. WardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Dunlap v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Griffiths v. Cigna Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Shiner v. MoriartySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Benjamin v. Hooper Electronic Supply Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1990
- Cosmas v. Bloomingdales Bros., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Butler v. Flo-Ron Vending Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.