Cate v. Fansler
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before J. B. Keaton, District Judge. STATEMENT OP.THE CASE. This was an action for malicious prosecution brought by Fansler against Ten Cate in the district court of Oklahoma county, because of an alleged malicious prosecution theretofore begun by Ten Cate and one H. C. Renard against the defendant in error.
Read the full summary
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before J. B. Keaton, District Judge. STATEMENT OP.THE CASE. This was an action for malicious prosecution brought by Fansler against Ten Cate in the district court of Oklahoma county, because of an alleged malicious prosecution theretofore begun by Ten Cate and one H. C. Renard against the defendant in error. The petition averred that on the 21st day of June, 1895, the defendants had conspired to extort money from the. plaintiff in payment of-a debt what had been owned jointly by the defendants, and that a mortgage on chattel property to secure…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court by
McAtee, J.:
It is argued, in the first place, that the court erred in permitting the plaintiff to prove specific damages, over the objection of the defendant in the action, under the allegation of general damages.
It is true that special damages must be averred in the petition, in order to notify the defendant of the nature of the plaintiff’s claims, and to prevent surprise to him at the trial, but it is not necessary in a case like the present, with the exception of the claim of damages for the payment of money to secure the discharge of the plaintiff from arrest, where…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of Pueblo v. GriffinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1887
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rhodes v. LamarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
- City of Cushing v. HighSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
- Roby v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914