Pearson v. O'Connor

District of Columbia District Court

Decided July 14, 1942

District of Columbia District Court · decided 1942-07-14

Relies on Cooper v. O'Connor · Silverman v. Ufa Eastern Division Distribution, Inc.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1942-07-14

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2016 · most notably Finley v. United States (1989), Fourco Glass Company v. Transmirra Products Corporation (1957)

10 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BAILEY, Associate Justice.

¶1Apart from any question as to the effect of the failure of the plaintiffs to reply to the defendants request for admission of the truth of certain facts, I am satisfied that the complaint fails to state a cause of action.

¶2The allegations of conspiracy are -immaterial save as forming a basis for joint liability. Cooper v. O’Connor, 69 App.D.C. 100, 99 F.2d 135, 118 A.L.R. 1440. If the suit be one for abuse of process, there being no allegation that the plaintiffs were arrested, or their property seized, or any injunction is-sued or'cloud oast upon the title to any of their property, there is no cause of action. Silverman v. Ufa Eastern Division Distribution, 135 Misc. 814, 236 N.Y.S. 18; if for malicious use of process or malicious prosecution, the suit is premature.

¶3The complaint should be dismissed.

¶4The -memorandum filed on May 26, 1942, was based on a misapprehension, and will be withdrawn.