Legal Opinion

King v. Graham

Texas Supreme Court

Decided November 7, 2003No. 01-0171PublishedCited by 51 opinions

1Per curiam

In Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. v. Lieck, we held that a person cannot be liable for malicious prosecution if “the decision whether to prosecute is left to the discretion of another, including a law enforcement official or the grand jury, unless the person provides information which he knows is false.” 1 Thus, proof that a complainant has knowingly furnished false information is necessary for liability when the decision to prosecute is within another’s discretion. But such proof is not sufficient. Lieck also requires proof that the false information “cause[d] a criminal prosecution.” 2 In…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. v. LieckTexas Supreme Court · 1994
  2. King v. Graham, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2001

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Marin Real Estate Partners, L.P. v. VogtCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2011
  3. In Re Bexar County Criminal District Attorney's OfficeTexas Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Texas Capital Bank N.A. v. Dallas Roadster, Ltd. (In Re Dallas Roadster, Ltd.)Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017
  5. Torres v. GSC Enterprises, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2007

46 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