[DOWNLOAD] "Henry Huffstutler v. Gordon R. Coates" by Supreme Court of Missouri # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Henry Huffstutler v. Gordon R. Coates
• Author : Supreme Court of Missouri
• Release Date : January 11, 1960
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 70 KB

Description

Henry Huffstutler recovered $7,000 actual and $3,000 punitive damages in his malicious prosecution action against Gordon R.
Coates. Coates appealed and claims that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a defendant's verdict, in giving and refusing
instructions, in permitting improper examination of witnesses by plaintiff's counsel, and that the judgment is excessive.
The criminal charge which plaintiff claimed defendant maliciously prosecuted against him was attempted arson. It was and is
undisputed that defendant executed an affidavit as a result of which plaintiff was arrested and held for trial in the circuit
court after a preliminary hearing before a magistrate; and was placed on trial in the circuit court where he was discharged
at the close of the state's evidence when the trial Judge sustained his motion for a judgment of acquittal. Defendant's point with respect to his contention as to a submissible case is that plaintiff failed to prove the essential
element of want of probable cause. Thus, we need not review the evidence to determine but may assume that plaintiff's evidence
was sufficient to cause these other constituitive elements of an action for malicious prosecution to be jury issues, viz.,
the commencement of the prosecution of a proceeding against the present plaintiff, its legal causation by the present defendant,
its determination in favor of present plaintiff, the presence of malice on the part of defendant, and damages to plaintiff
by reason of the proceeding. Higgins v. Knickmeyer-Fleer Realty & Investment Co., Mo., 74 S.W.2d 805, 812[1-4]. In determining
the question whether plaintiff's evidence was sufficient to make want of probable cause a jury question, we view the evidence
in the light most favorable to plaintiff, give him the benefit of all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom and, of
course, disregard defendant's evidence unfavorable to plaintiff. Hughes v. Aetna Ins. Co., Mo., 261 S.W.2d 942, 945[1-4].

Free Download "Henry Huffstutler v. Gordon R. Coates" PDF ePub Kindle