Tufshinsky v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. Co.

Citations

• 61 Pa. Super. 121
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 280

Syllabus

<p>Malicious prosecution — Probable cause — Malice — Evidence — Province of court and jury — Principal and agent.</p> <p>Malice in law exists where an act is done wrongfully and designedly by one person to the injury of another. Prosecutions may be instituted and pursued with pure motives, but so regardless of me forms of law and judicial proceedings as to render the transactions illegal and malicious. It may be inferred from the want of probable cause, and generally is, but its existence is a fact for the jury.</p> <p>The liability of a principal for the act of his agent in instituting an unfounded prosecution is governed by the general principles of agency, and where there is no express authority, and there has been no subsequent ratification of the act, the ultimate test is whether the agent acted within the scope of his implied authority. In determining this, each case must stand on its own facts.</p> <p>In an action against a railroad company for malicious prosecution, it appeared that the plaintiff, an umbrella mender, aged about sixty years, was seated in a waiting room of defendant’s station waiting for a train which was to leave in about one-half hour. He was eating his lunch and was dropping crumbs upon the floor and seats. A duly commissioned police officer employed by the railroad company arrested him, and took him before a justice of the peace, in whose office he was detained for several hours. The justice on the testimony of the officer committed the plaintiff to jail on the charge of disorderly conduct and fined him five dollars and costs. There was no evidence of disorderly conduct or that plaintiff resisted arrest. He was released from custody about-midnight by his daughter, who without his knowledge, paid to the jailor the amount of the fine imposed by the justice. An appeal was taken from the justice’s judgment, and after hearing before the county court he was discharged and restitution awarded. Held, that the case was for the jury, and that a ver