Hewitt v. Rice
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Mullarkey
delivefed the Opinion of the Court.
I. Introduction
The tort of malicious prosecution requires proof that the action allegedly maliciously prosecuted was terminated in favor of the moving party. An ex parte action, however, is exempt from the favorable termination requirement. In Thompson v. Maryland Casualty Co., 84 P.3d 496, 505 (Colo.2004), we left undecided the question whether a lis pendens filing comes within the ex parte exception to the favorable termination requirement. Affirming the court of appeals' decision in Hewitt v. Rice, 119 P.3d 541 (Colo.App.2004), we now decide that a lis…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Thompson v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2004
- Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1988
- Westfield Development Co. v. Rifle Investment AssociatesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1990
- DeVaney v. Thriftway Marketing Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
- Frey v. StonemanArizona Supreme Court · 1986
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Myers v. KoopmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Crandall v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 2010
- Sterenbuch v. GossColorado Court of Appeals · 2011
- Elliot H. Himmelfarb, M.D. v. Tracy R. AllainTennessee Supreme Court · 2012
- Mintz v. Accident & Injury Medical Specialists, PCColorado Court of Appeals · 2010
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.