Angelo v. Faul

Citations

• 85 Ill. 106

Syllabus

<p>1. Malicious prosecution—¿probable came a question of lam. Whether - the facts proven in an action for malicious prosecution constitute probable cause for commencing a criminal prosecution against a part)' charged, is a question of law. It is for the jury to And the facts, but when found it is a matter of law whether they constitute probable cause.</p> <p>2. Same—want of probable cause must be shown. It is not sufficient for the plaintiff, in an action for malicious prosecution, to show that he was not guilty of the charge on which he was arrested, hut it is also incumbent on him to show affirmatively that the prosecutor had no probable cause for commencing the prosecution.</p> <p>3. Same—good faith and probable cause. Good faith on the part of the prosecutor is always an important if not a vital inquiry in a suit for malicious prosecution, and if the belief in the party’s guilt is induced by facts and circumstances sufficient to cause a suspicion of guilt in the mind of a reasonably cautious person, it is a justification for commencing a criminal prosecution.</p> <p>4. An instruction, in an action for malicious prosecution, that mere good faith, or a mere belief of defendant that he had good cause for commencing criminal proceedings against the plaintiff is not sufficient, should be qualified according to the rule above laid down.</p> <p>5. Witness—credibility. An instruction that the jury may disbelieve the testimony of any witness who has wilfully sworn falsely to any material fact, unless corroborated by other unimpeached witnesses, should he qualified by the words, “or by circumstances in evidence,” and without such qualification it is erroneous.</p>