Sullivan v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently January 2013
17 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.
Relationships
Relies on Halberstadt v. . New York Life Ins. Co. · State v. Anderson · Reed v. Lindley · 15 Tex. Civ. App. 641 - Kruegel v. Nitschman · 26 Tex. Civ. App. 250 - Rogers v. Mullins
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is some confusion of authority upon the question of what is a termination of a prosecution upon which actions of this character may Ibe based. It is often said that a prosecution is so terminated when it is disposed of in such manner ‘that it cannot be revived.’ Cooley on Torts (3d Ed.) §§ 215, 216; 28 Tex.Jur. p. 455, § 7; Von Koehring v. Witte, 15 Tex.Civ.App. 646 , 40 S.W. 63 (writ ref.); Casebeer v. Drahoble, 13 Neb. 465 , 14 N.W. 397 ; Casebeer v. Rice, 18 Neb. 203 , 24 N.W. 693 . Or, by ‘acquittal, or in some manner equivalent thereto.’ Note, 69 A.L.R. 1062 ; Von Koehring v. Witte, supra. Undoubtedly, however, these definitions call for, or at least admit of, further construction, or qualification. For it seems well settled that the termination contemplated does not mean the end of the purpose or intention to prosecute, or a final adjudication of the accused person’s guilt or innocence, but means, rather, the termination of the particular prosecution, or proceeding, complained of, so that, if the prosecutor intends to proceed further in his purpose, he must institute proceedings de novo, or, as sometimes said, is ‘put to a new proceeding.’ Cooley on Torts (3d Ed.) § 16; Newell on Malicious Prosecution, p. 343, § 12; 14 A. & E. Law 29, 30; 18 R.C.L. p. 21 et seq.; annotations in 39 L.R.A.,N.S., 1215; 2 L.R.A.,N.S., 927.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Plaintiffs'] evidence raises no more than mere surmise or suspicion of the fact sought to be established by them. Actions for damages for malicious prosecution are not favored in the law, and require more satisfactory proof than is required in ordinary lawsuits; and certainly recovery in such cases cannot be had upon mere surmise and suspicion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.