Fait v. Bannon

Citations

• 127 Md. 698
• 97 A. 880
• 1916 Md. LEXIS 182

Syllabus

<p>Malicious prosecution', what must be proved; malice; want of probable cause; advice of counsel. Prayers: abstractions of lawj exceptions to — j specific exceptions.</p> <p>In order to maintain an action of malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove affirmatively that he has been prosecuted, or that a prosecution has been instituted by the defendant or one of them; that such prosecution has terminated in his acquittal or exoneration from such charge, and that the prosecution was malicious and without probable cause.</p> <p>Malice in such cases may be presumed upon the establishment of the want of probable cause; and the burden of proof is then upon the defendant to show such facts as will warrant a jury in finding that he was not actuated by malice.</p> <p>“Maliee” in such actions is not to be considered as spite or hatred against the individual, but that the party is actuated by improper or indirect motives.</p> <p>The want of probable cause is a mixed question of law and fact. '</p> <p>What will amount to want of probable cause is a question of law for the court; and the existence of the facts relied upon as evidence of such want of probable cause in any particular case, is a question for the jury.</p> <p>Prayers that are mere abstractions of law are improper, although the principles they announce may be correct.</p> <p>In order to present for the review of the Court of Appeals, the action of the trial court on a prayer that was objected to because unsustained by any evidence, a special exception must be noted.</p> <p>For the advice of counsel to serve as a defense to an action of malicious prosecution, it must appear that all the material facts in the possession of the defendant were fully and fairly made known to the counsel.</p>