New York Supreme Court, 1892

Holden v. Staring

Holden v. Staring
New York Supreme Court · Decided November 15, 1892
21 N.Y.S. 1126; 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 920 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

E. R. Brown, for appellants., Thompson & Chapman, for respondent.

Holden v. Staring

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Upon the trial the defendants requested the court to hold that no cause of action for malicious prosecution was established, and the court refused so to hold, and the defendants excepted. We think this exception was well taken. There was no sufficient proof of want of probable cause to maintain the action for malicious prosecution, therefore a new trial should be ordered. Judgment and order reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide .the event.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.