Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

209 Ill. App. 112

Mioduszewski v. Spoganitz

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 17, 1917

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1917-12-17

<p>Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Patrick B. Flanagan, Judge, presiding.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1960

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed with finding of fact · Decided 1917-12-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Malicious pjbosecution, § 65*—what is not evidence of malice in prosecuting criminal case. The fact that defendant, in an action for malicious prosecution, exhibited some temper in discussing the supposed delinquencies of plaintiff was not' evidence of malice, where defendant had instituted the prosecution of a criminal case upon advice of competent counsel on a full and fair statement of all facts within defendant’s knowledge or which he could obtain on reasonable inquiry. ^4. Malicious prosecution, § 65*—what is effect of termination of criminal prosecution as proof of malice or want of probable cause. The termination of a criminal prosecution in plaintiff’s favor, on account of which an action for malicious prosecution is brought, did not tend to prove either the element of malice or want of probable cause.
/209/illapp/112 · .json · Public domain