Hobbs v. Ray
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Trespass on the case foT false imprisonment. On demurrer to- the declaration and also on demurrer to a plea in abatement.
1Per curiam
We think the defendant’s demurrer to the plaintiff’s declaration should be sustained.
The facts set out in the writ and declaration show a case for malicious prosecution, and not for false imprisonment; and these actions are quite distinct and different from each other. An action of trespass for false imprisonment, lies for an arrest, or some other similar act of the defendant, ‘ ‘ which, ” as is said, “upon the stating of it, is manifestly illegal;” while malicious prosecution, on the contrary, lies for a pros- edition, which, upon the stating of it is manifestly legal. Johnstone v. Sutton, 1…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Colter v. LowerIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Turpin v. RemyIndiana Supreme Court · 1833
- Nebenzahl v. TownsendNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1881
3Cited by9 opinions
- Powers v. CarvalhoSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1977
- Kittler v. KelschNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927
- Commonwealth Trust Co. v. CiriglianoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Moody v. McElroySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1986
- National Bank v. BinghamMontana Supreme Court · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.