Auer v. Mauser

Citations

• 6 Pa. Super. 618
• 1898 Pa. Super. LEXIS 213

Syllabus

<p>Malicious prosecution — Essential grounds.</p> <p>The grounds on which an action for malicious prosecution must rest are well settled; it must appear to have been commenced maliciously and without probable cause; these essentials must coexist.</p> <p>Province of court and jury — What constitutes for the court — Existence for the jury.</p> <p>What circumstances constitute probable cause is for the court; whether they have been shown in a particular ease is for the jury.</p> <p>Evidence — Probable cause and malice — When implied — Presumption from acquittal— Question for jury.</p> <p>Malice may be implied from want of probable cause and may be rebutted by evidence showing its absence; but want of probable cause cannot be implied from malice, and may exist without it. The inquiry as to both must relate to the commencement of the prosecution and the circumstances leading to it. It is permitted to show’ how the prosecution terminated as bearing on the existence or nonexistence of cause and malice. An acquittal or lawful discharge of the defendant is prima facie evidence of want of probable cause, and therefore sufficient to carry the case to the jury.</p> <p>In an action for malicious prosecution the case is for the jury where it appears that the plaintiff in the action as defendant in the prosecution,' was lawfully discharged, although there was evidence tending to establish probable cause and to rebut presumption of malice.</p> <p>Evidence — Malicious prosecution — Conversations between prosecutor and justice.</p> <p>Evidence of conversations between the prosecutor and the justice after the prosecution had been instituted, in the absence of the defendant in the prosecution, are inadmissible to rebut the presumption of malice.</p>