Kashare v. Robbins
This text of 135 N.Y.S. 1041 (Kashare v. Robbins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The plaintiff charges that the defendant, maliciously and without reasonable and probable cause, charged him with the crime of larceny before a magistrate, and applied to and procured from the magistrate a summons requiring the plaintiff to answer to that charge; that the defendant caused said summons to be issued and be served upon the plaintiff; and that, upon the appearance of the plaintiff, the magistrate discharged the plaintiff after hearing the testimony produced. The record in this case is sufficient to show that the defendant# without probable cause, accused the plaintiff of the theft of $11; that he served upon the plaintiff a summons in the form provided by section 82 of chapter 659 of the Laws of 1910. This summons stated that:
“Complaint having been made by Jacob Robbins that you did commit the offense of larceny, you are hereby summoned to appear before me, or any city magistrate holding this court, at No. Franklin and Centre streets, on the 21st day of September, 1910, at 9 o’clock a. m., to the end that an investigation may be made of said complaint. And upon your failure to appear at the time and place mentioned you are liable to a fine of not exceeding $25.”
At the hearing the magistrate discharged the plaintiff. It is not disputed that the defendant applied to and procured from the magistrate this summons, but there is no evidence that defendant stated to the magistrate any untrue facts, or that he presented any false evidence upon the hearing. In my opinion, this evidence is insufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
“The affiant is responsible for those statements, but not for the legal conclusions drawn therefrom, either by the police magistrate, or the district attorney, or grand jury.” Thaule v. ICrekeler, supra.
In a case where the judicial proceeding instigated was merely an investigation, we cannot presume that the defendant’s complaint contained any statement of facts that were false and made without probable cause.
Judgment should be reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
SEABURY, J., concurs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 N.Y.S. 1041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kashare-v-robbins-nyappterm-1912.