¶1
¶2
¶3Judgment affirmed.
¶4Note. — Reported in 107 N. E. 743. As to what is necessary to support an action for malicious prosecution, see 12 Am. Dec. 265; 26 Am. St. 127. See, also, under (1) 12 Cyc. 201; (2) 11 Cyc. 200.
58 Ind. App. 97
Decided February 16, 1915
Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 1915-02-16
<p>1. IiAkceny. — Prosecution. — Jurisdiction. — City Court. — Under §SS42 Burns 1914, Acts 1905 p. 236, §216, the city court has jurisdiction to try and determine a prosecution for petit larceny. p. 98.</p> <p>2. Action. — Prosecution as Poor Person. — Nonresident.-—-Under §§261, 616 Burns 1914, §§260, 589 R. S. 1881, one may be permitted to prosecute an action as a poor person, even though not a resident of the State, p. 98.</p>
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1920
2 state decisions
Relies on Fuller & Fuller Co. v. Mehl · Cottrell v. Cottrell · Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Jacobs
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1915-02-16
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1
¶2
¶3Judgment affirmed.
¶4Note. — Reported in 107 N. E. 743. As to what is necessary to support an action for malicious prosecution, see 12 Am. Dec. 265; 26 Am. St. 127. See, also, under (1) 12 Cyc. 201; (2) 11 Cyc. 200.