Belflower v. Blackshere

• Decision Date: 22 March 1955
• Docket Number: No. 36429,36429
• Citation: 281 P.2d 423,49 A.L.R.2d 917
• Parties: , 1955 OK 74 Delmer Eugene BELFLOWER, Plaintiff in Error, v. A. F. BLACKSHERE, B. J. Revels and L. J. Hilbert, Defendants in Error.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

Page 423

281 P.2d 423

49 A.L.R.2d 917, 1955 OK 74

Delmer Eugene BELFLOWER, Plaintiff in Error, v. A. F. BLACKSHERE, B. J. Revels and L. J. Hilbert, Defendants in Error.

No. 36429.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

March 22, 1955.

Syllabus by the Court.

Under statutes barring actions for false imprisonment begun more than a specified time after the accrual of the cause of action, the limitations begin to run from the termination of the imprisonment.

Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County; W. A. Carlile, Judge.

Action by Delmer Eugene Belflower against A. F. Blackshere, B. J. Revels and L. J. Hilbert for illegal arrest and false imprisonment. Demurrer to plaintiff's amended petition sustained and case dismissed upon his election to stand upon his amended petition. Affirmed.

Russell L. Morgan, Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

A. L. Jeffrey, Municipal Counselor, Richard D. Hampton, Asst. Municipal Counselor, Oklahoma City, for defendants in error.

Carroll Samara and Keith A. McMillin, Oklahoma City, for defendant in error, A. F. Blackshere.

HALLEY, Justice.

This action was commenced in the District Court of Oklahoma County by Delmer Eugene Belflower on August 7, 1953, against A. F. Blackshere, B. J. Revels and L. J. Hilbert, to recover damages for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment. The trial court sustained separate demurrers of defendants to plaintiff's petition and amended petition and dismissed the action upon the election of the plaintiff to stand upon his amended petition. Plaintiff has appealed by transcript. The demurrers were general but each put in issue the statutes of limitation, as provided in Section 95, 12 O.S.1951, subdivision 4, which states that actions for 'malicious prosecution, or false imprisonment' must be commenced within one year and that is the question for our determination.

Since the parties appear here as in the trial court, we shall refer to them as plaintiff and defendants.

It is alleged that on April 16, 1952, plaintiff, while he was at his home in the Town of Village, an incorporated town in Oklahoma County, the defendants, Blackshere and Revels, then Police Officers of the City of Oklahoma City, approached plaintiff, exhibiting a warrant for his arrest for an over-time parking infraction of the Traffic Ordinances of the City of Oklahoma City, and informed plaintiff that he was under arrest and compelled him to accompany them to the Police Headquarters, and that as '* * * a result of said unlawful arrest, illegal taking into custody, plaintiff was booked at said Police Headquarters for two other alleged violations of the City of Oklahoma City Ordinances for overtime parking, other than the one charged in the warrant for his arrest.'

That he was then and there imprisoned and deprived of his liberties for over an hour, and was only released by virtue of a cash bail bond in the sum of $60 posted by his attorney, and that his arrest was illegal for various reasons and he also set out elements of damage.

Plaintiff further alleged that he was compelled to appear and attend proceedings resulting from his illegal arrest; that one charge against him was dismissed April 18, 1952, and final judgment rendered for him discharging him completely as to that charge and his cash bond returned to him; but that the other two charges were held under advisement and judgment rendered thereon on July 31, 1952, discharging him completely and restoring his cash bail.

It was further alleged that the arresting officers, Blackshere and Revels, arrested and imprisoned him in pursuance of a scheme and plan previously announced and published by L. J. Hilbert, Chief of Police for Oklahoma City, and was done to humiliate such persons as the plaintiff, and that the arresting officers were acting as agents of L. J. Hilbert, Chief of Police and performed all actions complained of with the knowledge and consent and instructions of L. J. Hilbert.

Plaintiff alleges that his attorney was required to submit briefs in support of his contentions of illegal arrest and false imprisonment, and that plaintiff had to wait long periods on various dates in the Police Court at various hearings until July 31, 1952, when the two remaining charges were dismissed and judgment rendered in his favor, fully discharging him from said charges.

It is then alleged that each of the defendants were absent from the State for various periods until July and August, 1953.

September 25, 1953, an amended petition was filed and separate demurrers thereto were sustained December 4, 1953, and on that date plaintiff's action was dismissed upon his election to stand upon his amended petition. Plaintiff gave notice of his appeal to this Court. The ruling of the court was based upon Section 95, 12 O.S.1951, providing that an action for false imprisonment must be brought within one year 'after the cause of action shall have accrued, and not afterwards'.

More than one year had elapsed from April 16, 1952, when plaintiff was arrested, placed in jail and released after confinement of about an hour.

On July 31, 1952, the two remaining charges against plaintiff were dismissed and his bail money returned to him in full. It was slightly more than one year from July 31, 1952, to August 7, 1953, when this action was filed.

In an illegal arrest and false imprisonment...