Martin Ex Rel. Martin v. Reidsville Motor Co.

161 S.E. 77, 201 N.C. 641, 1931 N.C. LEXIS 57

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Conceding, without deciding, that the criminal action against the plaintiff was instituted for retaliatory purposes only, nevertheless there is no evidence of any act done therein contrary to the orderly and regular prosecution of the case. Stanford v. Grocery Co., 143 N. C., 419, 55 S. E., 815.

The case of Lockhart v. Bear, 117 N. C., 298, 23 S. E., 484, cited and relied upon by the plaintiff, was decided upon a demurrer to the complaint, rather than on a demurrer to the evidence, and is quite different in the facts alleged.

Affirmed.