Andersen v. Spencer

• Decision Date: 10 December 1940
• Docket Number: 45384.
• Citation: 294 N.W. 904,229 Iowa 595
• Parties: ANDERSEN v. SPENCER.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

294 N.W. 904

229 Iowa 595

ANDERSEN v. SPENCER.

No. 45384.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

December 10, 1940

Appeal from District Court, Audubon County; H. J. Mantz, Judge.

This is an action at law for false arrest and imprisonment. Trial to jury resulted in a verdict of $250 against appellant Spencer. From a judgment on verdict, he appeals.

Affirmed.

L. L Ryan and Graham & Graham, all of Audubon, for appellant.

Dalton & Dalton, of Atlantic, for appellee.

SAGER Justice.

The following statement taken from the instructions of the trial court is sustained by the record: " * * * on the evening of March 6, 1937, the defendant Arnold Spencer was Mayor of the City of Audubon, Iowa, and that the defendant Henry Petersen was Deputy Marshall and night watchman of said city. That some time during the evening of said date the said Andersen met * * * Spencer * * * that some controversy arose between * * * Andersen and * * * Spencer and that thereupon * * * Spencer called to the defendant Petersen and orally ordered * * * Petersen to take * * * Andersen to the County Jail and there lock him up, that following this direction * * * Petersen as an officer commanded * * * Andersen to go with him to the County Jail where he locked him up, and that * * * Andersen remained confined there until some time about noon of the following day when he was released by Fred Clemmensen, Sheriff; that no information was filed against * * * Andersen and no warrant issued against him, and no hearing was had upon any charge against him at any time before his release."

It might be added that no action was later taken against plaintiff. The mayor seems to have been satisfied with the arrest and confinement of plaintiff, but not so appellee. Irked by the treatment accorded him, he betook himself to the district court for redress in the action from which this appeal results.

Appellant Spencer, in argument, presents six numbered reasons why a reversal should be had but, in effect, they resolve into two. One complaint is over the refusal to give requested instruction No. 2 which reads as follows: " You are instructed that a peace officer making an arrest without a warrant has a reasonable time within which to file an information charging the offense for which the arrest was made, and reasonable time as herein used must be determined by reference to all the facts and circumstances surrounding the arrest and detention, including the time of day or night and week."

The point of the argument here is that the court should have told the jury that the officer might delay for a reasonable time the filing of an information, or before taking the plaintiff before a magistrate. Whether approximately 18 hours would be a reasonable...