Legal Opinion

Brennan v. Tremco Inc.

California Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 2001No. 2No. S087204PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CHIN, J.

We granted review to decide whether a person may sue for the malicious prosecution of an action that the parties resolved through contractual arbitration. Because a contractual arbitration proceeding does not result in a favorable termination of a prior action, a necessary element of malicious prosecution, we conclude a person may not do so.

I. The Facts and Procedural History

In 1992, Tremco Incorporated (Tremco) sued a former employee, Walter M. Brennan, after he went to work for one of Tremco’s competitors. The *313complaint alleged breach of contract, conversion, misappropriation…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Silberg v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & OlikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Crowley v. KatlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Little v. Auto Stiegler, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Coachella Valley Mosquito & Vector Control District v. California Public Employment Relations BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Abramson v. Juniper Networks, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  4. Metalclad Corp. v. Ventana Environmental Organizational PartnershipCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  5. Young v. Allstate Insurance Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2008

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API