Norman v. Young
This text of 132 S.E. 414 (Norman v. Young) 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.
Opinion
1. Where a house in which cotton was stored was found to be open early in the morning just before day, and some of the cotton was missing, and where, leading from the house, were automobile tracks containing a peculiar impression made by the tires and which when followed by the owner of the cotton and several neighbors led to tin-home of a person where was found an automobile the tires of which had markings corresponding to the impressions in the tracks, which automobile this person admitted was his, and where, the evening before the cotton disappeared, the same person went, in an automobile, along the road which passed near the cotton-house, the facts failed to show a want of probable cause for a prosecution against him for larceny. Civil Code (1910), § 4440; Woodruff v. Doss, 20 Ga. App. 639 (93 S. E. 316).
2. In a suit against the owner of the cotton, for malicious prosecution, [222]*222where the above-reeited facts were established by undisputed testimony, a verdict for the defendant was properly directed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
132 S.E. 414, 35 Ga. App. 221, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norman-v-young-gactapp-1926.