Legal Opinion

Dickerson v. Atlantic Refining Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 15, 1931PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, O. J.

To make out a case of malicious prosecution, the plaintiff is required to allege and to prove that the defendant instituted or participated in a proceeding against him maliciously, without probable cause, which ended in failure. Wingate v. Causey, 196 N. C., 71, 144 S. E., 530; Bowen v. Pollard, 173 N. C., 129, 91 S. E., 711; Carpenter Co. v. Hanes, 167 N. C., 551, 83 S. E., 577; Humphries v. Edwards, 164 N. C., 154, 80 S. E., 165; Stanford v. Grocery Co., 143 N. C., 419, 55 S. E., 815; R. R. v. Hardware Co., 138 N. C., 174, 50 S. E., 571; S. c., 143 N. C., 54, 55 S. E., 422; Ely…

2Cases cited96 opinions

  1. Stacey v. EmerySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Speas v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  3. Denver & Rio Grande Railway v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  4. Daniel v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  5. Wheeler v. NesbittSupreme Court of the United States · 1861

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. White v. Consolidated Planning, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  2. Jaffe v. StoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Norburn v. MacKieSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. Cook v. LanierSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. Raper v. McCRORY-McLELLAN CORPORATIONSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

20 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