Baker v. Langley

60 S.E. 371, 3 Ga. App. 751, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 421
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 24, 1908·No. 751·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. In a suit to recover damages for malicious prosecution, it is sufficient proof that a prosecution was carried on, to show that a warrant was issued, an arrest thereunder made, and a commitment for trial had. Francis v. Wood, 75 Ga. 648; Swift v. Witchard, 103 Ga. 193 (29 S. E. 762).

2. Any defect in the accusation in the trial court, or any waiver of such defect by the defendant, could not affect his right to recover damages in his suit for malicious prosecution.

.3. The advice of the State’s attorney is no defense, in a suit for malicious prosecution, unless such advice is given after a full, fair, and complete statement by the prosecutor of all the facts known to him relating to the offense. Hicks v. Brantley, 102 Ga. 264 (29 S. E. 459).

4. There was no material error of law, and the evidence fully supports the verdict. Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Baker v. Langley, 60 S.E. 371, 3 Ga. App. 751, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 421 (Ga. Ct. App. 1908).

60 S.E. 371 (Baker v. Langley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barnes v. Gossett Oil Co.
197 S.E. 902 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Thornton v. Story
101 S.E. 309 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1919)