Findley v. Buchanan

In malicious prosecution, the party’s acquittal by the justice, under whose war» rant he was arrested, is sufficient; and the suit may bo commenced after-wards on the same day. Where there are several counts, some good and others bad, the declaration cannot be objected to, in this state, after a general verdict. The informal appointment of a guardian cannot be assigned for error. If the verdict in a civil suit, instead of finding the defendant guilty, &c., be merely far the plaintiff, &c., it is sufficient.

APPEAL from the Clark Circuit Court. — Case, by Buchanan against Findley, for malicious prosecution.' The declaration contained two counts, the substance of which was, that the defendant, falsely and maliciously and without probable cause, procured a justice’s warrant against the plaiutiif, upon a charge of felony, and caused him to be arrested, and taken into custody; that nothing being shown against the plaintiff, he was afterwards, by the justice, wholly acquitted and discharged. — Plea, not guilty. — Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff below. Findley assigned for error: 1st, That the justice had no authority to acquit (1). — 2dly, That the action was commenced on the day the plaintiff was discharged (2). — 3dly, That the second count contained no cause of action, and the verdict was general (3). — 4thly, That the plaintiff was an infant and sued by guardian improperly appointed (4). — 5thly, That the verdict, instead of finding the defendant guilty, was merely for the plaintiff, &c.