McCool v. Mahoney
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and an order denying a new trial, in the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, in and for the City and County of San Francisco. Daingereield, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 1, Ross, J.:
Plaintiff sued defendants, jointly, for malicious arrest and prosecution. The defendants answered separately. The cause was tried with a jury, and this verdict was returned: “ We, the jury in the above-entitled action, find for plaintiff, against Ma-honey $3,000, and against Small $500.” Judgment was thereupon rendered that plaintiff recover of Mahoney $3,000, of Small $500, and of Mahoney and Small $282.75 costs of suit. The defendants made a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and appealed from the judgment and the order denying them a new trial.
After the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Layman v. HendrixSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Beal v. . FinchNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Hardy v. ThomasMississippi Supreme Court · 1852
- O'Shea v. KirkerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1859
- Dickey v. GrantNew York Supreme Court · 1826
3Cited by10 opinions
- Delos v. Farmers Insurance GroupCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Cole v. Roebling Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Jenkins v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Thomson v. CatalinaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Mixon v. Riverview HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.