Secor v. Babcock

2 Johns. 203
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1807·Published·Cited by 17 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The justice had power, on examination of a charge oísuspicion of felony, or of having stolen goods, to dismiss the plaintiff below, if he was satisfied that there was no ground for the suspicion. The acquittal was lawful, and there was a sufficient ground for a suit for a malicious prosecution. The judgment below must he affirmed.

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

Secor v. Babcock, 2 Johns. 203 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1807).

2 Johns. 203 (Secor v. Babcock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Engelgau v. Walter
182 P.2d 987 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1947)
People ex rel. Joseph Fallert Brewing Co. v. Lyman
53 A.D. 470 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
Eastman v. Monastes
51 P. 1095 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1898)
Sweeney v. Perney
40 Kan. 102 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1888)
Schippel v. Norton
38 Kan. 567 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1888)
Moulton v. Beecher
1 Abb. N. Cas. 193 (New York Supreme Court, 1876)
Marbourg v. Smith
11 Kan. 554 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1873)
Cole v. Curtis
16 Minn. 182 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1870)
Fay v. . O'Neill
36 N.Y. 11 (New York Court of Appeals, 1867)
Israel v. Brooks
23 Ill. 575 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1860)
Brown v. Lakeman
66 Mass. 482 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1853)
Clark v. Cleveland
6 Hill & Den. 344 (New York Supreme Court, 1844)
Hartsock v. Reddick
6 Blackf. 255 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1842)
Wagner v. Kenner
2 Rob. 120 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1842)
Burlingame v. Burlingame
8 Cow. 141 (New York Supreme Court, 1828)
M'Cormick v. Sisson
7 Cow. 715 (New York Supreme Court, 1827)
Bostick v. Rutherford.
11 N.C. 83 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1825)