Cole v. Rogers Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cole v. Rogers Inc.

167 S.E. 781, 46 Ga. App. 450, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 92

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 11, 1933

Docket22432

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 167 S.E. 781 (Cole v. Rogers Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cole v. Rogers Inc., 167 S.E. 781, 46 Ga. App. 450, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 92 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. It is a lawful and legitimate use of the criminal processes of court to prosecute a person for the commission of a crime, and, to that end, arrest and hold him lawfully in custody until he is lawfully discharged; and where a person held in custody under criminal process which has been put to no other use has been released on bail, and, after his release, he, without any compulsion from any use to which the process was put, but being motivated merely by the pendency of the criminal proceeding, and for the purpose of relieving himself of the criminal prosecution thereunder, voluntarily, by the payment of a sum of money, discharges whatever civil liability he may be under, arising out of the transaction which formed the basis for the criminal prosecution, and pays the accrued court costs of the prosecution, it does not appear that the process of the court has been put to any use other than that for which it was lawfully intended.

2. The petition failed to set out a cause of action for damages arising out of an abuse of legal process, and the court did not err in sustaining the demurrer.

3. The question whether the petition alleges a cause of action for malicious prosecution is not presented for determination.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., mid Sutton, J., concm'.

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

Stephens, J.

1. It is a lawful and legitimate use of the criminal processes of court to prosecute a person for the commission of a crime, and, to that end, arrest and hold him lawfully in custody until he is lawfully discharged; and where a person held in custody under criminal process which has been put to no other use has been released on bail, and, after his release, he, without any compulsion from any use to which the process was put, but being motivated merely by the pendency of the criminal proceeding, and for the purpose of relieving himself of the criminal prosecution thereunder, voluntarily, by the payment of a sum of money, discharges whatever civil liability he may be under, arising out of the transaction which formed the basis for the criminal prosecution, and pays the accrued court costs of the prosecution, it does not appear that the process of the court has been put to any use other than that for which it was lawfully intended.

2. The petition failed to set out a cause of action for damages arising out of an abuse of legal process, and the court did not err in sustaining the demurrer.

3. The question whether the petition alleges a cause of action for malicious prosecution is not presented for determination.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., mid Sutton, J., concm'.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.E. 781, 46 Ga. App. 450, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cole-v-rogers-inc-gactapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack