Akins v. Warren
| Decision Date | 02 February 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 46319,46319 |
| Citation | 258 Ga. 853,375 S.E.2d 605 |
| Parties | AKINS v. WARREN. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Gerald M. Edenfield, Susan W. Cox, Edenfield, Stone & Cox, Statesboro, for John B. Akins.
Lovett Bennett, William J. Neville, Jr., Callaway, Neville & Brinson, Metter, for Randy Warren.
This court granted certiorari to review the holding of the Court of Appeals announced in division two of Warren v. Akins, 188 Ga.App. 602, 373 S.E.2d 802 (1988). We reverse, not because of any difference we have with the rule of substantive law stated there, but because we hold the procedural rules of summary judgment law were misapplied.
Akins accused Warren of taking property from him while serving as his employee and prosecuted him in superior court for the crime of theft by taking. At the close of the State's case Warren moved for a directed verdict of acquittal. The motion was denied and the case went to the jury which acquitted Warren.
Then Warren sued Akins for malicious prosecution. He alleged Akins prosecuted the criminal action falsely, maliciously and without probable cause. Akins filed a motion for summary judgment supported by evidence of the denial of the motion for directed verdict of acquittal in the criminal trial. Relying on our decision in Monroe v. Sigler, 256 Ga. 759, 353 S.E.2d 23 (1987), the trial court granted summary judgment to Akins. The Court of Appeals reversed.
1. One has a civil cause of action or claim where a criminal prosecution was carried on maliciously and without any probable cause resulting in damage to the plaintiff. OCGA § 51-7-40. If it is shown there was probable cause for the criminal prosecution the civil action for malicious prosecution fails.
In this case Warren sufficiently pleaded a claim for malicious prosecution and in doing so he alleged, as he must have done, that the criminal prosecution by Akins was without probable cause. He also met the requirement of alleging malice but this is not at issue here. Then he went a step further than is required adding an allegation that Akins charged him "falsely" in the criminal case.
2. In Monroe, supra, this court laid down the rule that probable cause is established when a trial judge denies a motion for directed verdict of acquittal in a criminal prosecution after hearing the state's evidence. However, this can be overcome by proving the order denying the motion was procured by use of fraud or corruption.
Both parties and the Court of Appeals' opinion agree with the above observations. Where we differ with the opinion of the Court of Appeals is in the application of these rules in the summary judgment procedure.
3. The Court of Appeals reasoned that the summary judgment motion failed to completely pierce the pleadings of the complaint because Warren alleged Akins proceeded falsely in the criminal action....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reid v. Waste Indus. USA, Inc.
...in procuring the denial. E.g., Monroe v. Sigler , 256 Ga. 759, 761 (4), 353 S.E.2d 23 (1987) ; see also Akins v. Warren , 258 Ga. 853, 854 (2), 375 S.E.2d 605 (1989) ; Wolf Camera v. Royter , 253 Ga. App. 254, 558 S.E.2d 797 (2002). Although the trial court took note of Reid's argument that......
-
Rowe v. CSX Transp., Inc.
...evidence to rebut the prima facie proof of probable cause, no disputed issue of fact precluded summary judgment. Akins v. Warren, 258 Ga. 853(4), 375 S.E.2d 605 (1989). This alone is fatal to their case. In addition, however, no issues remain to be tried on the element of malice. Rowe and B......
- Roper v. State
-
Haile v. Pittman, A89A1391
...Ga. at 761(6), 353 S.E.2d 23. See also Warren v. Akins, 188 Ga.App. 602, 603(2), 373 S.E.2d 802 (1988), rev'd on other grounds, 258 Ga. 853, 375 S.E.2d 605 (1989); Seven Hills Security, Inc. v. Dillingham, 188 Ga.App. 1, 2, 372 S.E.2d 1 (1988); Griffin v. Ga. Power Co., 186 Ga.App. 565, 566......