Winckel v. Von Maur, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the store security officer instigated criminal prosecution by filing a complaint with the magistrate in order to hold the plaintiff in custody and such a complaint was required before the police could make an arrest
• holding objections that instruction was \not a part of any standard instructions\ and was not \appropriate\ were \inadequate\
• holding objections that instruction was “not a part of any standard instructions” and was not “appropriate” were “inadequate”
• indicating uncertainty whether qualified privilege should attach to Von Maur employee’s accusations of theft from other stores
• abrogated on other grounds by Barreca v. Nicholas, 683 N.W.2d 111 (Iowa 2004)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).