TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Iron Mountain Bank v. Mercantile Bank

Iron Mountain Bank v. Mercantile Bank, 4 Mo. App. 505 (1877)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Missouri Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 27, 1877
Judges
Well
Citations
4 Mo. App. 5051877 Mo. App. LEXIS 125
Disposition
Reversed and remanded.
Headnotes
1. In a common-law action, not on the bond, for damages occasioned by an injunction, there can be no recovery unless it be averred and shown that the process of the court was, through malice and without probable cause, abused..' 2. A corporation may be liable for a malicious prosecution.
Summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. cited: Keber v. Mercantile Banlc, ante, p. 195. cited: Gasper son v. sSproule, 39 Mo. 39 ; Mysenburg v. Schlujper, 48 Mo. 431.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Well

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Bake well, J.,

delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

The case presents the same question determined by this court in tbe case of Keber v. Mercantile Bank, recently decided by this court. Tbe plaintiff seeks to avail itself of its common-law remedy for damages arising from an injunction, but does not charge that tbe injunction was an abuse of tbe process of tbe court through malice and without probable cause. In this case the demurrer of defendant was overruled by the court, and plaintiff obtained judgment. In the Keber case the demurrer was sustained. Otherwise, the cases are the same.

• The Circuit Court erred in overruling the demurrer of defendant, and the judgment cannot be sustained. There can be no recovery of damages arising from an injunction, except in an action on the bond, unless it be averred and shown that the process of the court was abused maliciously and without probable cause.

Counsel for respondent argues that, if this be so, there can be no recovery against a corporation for damages caused by an injunction, except upon the bond, because, he says, a corporation is incapable of malice. A corporation, however, is liable for torts ; it can commit trespass and dissei-zin, and it is now held in Missouri, as generally elsewhere, that a corporation may be liable for the malicious acts of its agents. Gillett v. Railroad Co., 55 Mo. 318 . A corporation may be liable for a malicious prosecution commenced by its agents in the scope of their employment. 'There has been a complete change in the rulings in this *507 respect since Childs v. Bank of Missouri was determined. Tbe common law action for damages arising from an injunction is essentially an action for malicious prosecution. Tbe failure in tbe suit determines tbe wrongfulness of tbe claim, but it does not therefore give a common-law action for damages to defendant. The wrong is not tbe falsehood ■or injustice of tbe claim, but that it was without probable cause. It is, therefore, not'enough to allege that the action was wrongfully brought. The case of Keber v. Mercantile Bank is decisive of the case at bar, and the judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed and the cause remanded.

All the judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1883–1884: 21887–1888: 11891–1892: 11899–1900: 11907–1908: 11911–1912: 11915–1916: 21957–1958: 12019–2020: 118832026peak 1883 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Owens175 S.W. 1039 (Ky. Ct. App. 1915)
  2. Jordan v. Ala. Great Southern Railroad74 Ala. 85 (1883)
  3. Rivers v. Yazoo & Mississippi Railroad43 So. 471 (Miss. 1907)
  4. City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gaslight Co.82 Mo. 349 (1884)
  5. Powell v. Woodbury83 A. 541 (Vt. 1912)
  6. Glen Jean, Lower Loup & D. R. v. Kanawha, Glen Jean & E. R.35 S.E. 978 (W. Va. 1900)

Most recent

  1. Gaume v. N.M. Interstate Stream Comm'n2019 NMCA 064, 450 P.3d 476
  2. Hamilton v. Hecht299 S.W.2d 577 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957)
  3. White v. International Textbook Co.173 Iowa 192 (1916)
  4. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Owens175 S.W. 1039 (Ky. Ct. App. 1915)
  5. Powell v. Woodbury83 A. 541 (Vt. 1912)
  6. Rivers v. Yazoo & Mississippi Railroad43 So. 471 (Miss. 1907)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Gillett v. Mo. Valley R.R., 55 Mo. 315 (1874) 25

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list