Eschbach v. Hurtt

• Decision Date: 15 June 1877
• Parties: JOHN ESCHBACH v. GEORGE W. HURTT, use of RUFUS W. APPLEGARTH.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

47 Md. 61

JOHN ESCHBACH v. GEORGE W. HURTT, use of RUFUS W. APPLEGARTH.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

June 15, 1877

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Baltimore City.

This suit was brought in the Superior Court of Baltimore City, on the 11th day of December, 1875, by George W. Hurtt against John Eschbach, to recover damages for the malicious prosecution of Hurtt by Eschbach.

Hurtt was prosecuted on the charges, 1st, of obtaining money under false pretences, and 2nd, for a certain misdemeanor. On both charges the verdict of the jury was, "not guilty;" whereupon he brought suit against Eschbach, the prosecuting witness, alleging injury by said prosecution, 1st, in his credit and reputation, being thereby brought into public scandal and disgrace; 2nd, by being obliged to expend large sums of money in defending himself and manifesting his innocence, and 3rd, in that he hath been greatly hindered and prevented from transacting his lawful and necessary affairs and business.

The defendant pleaded the general issue; issue was joined by the plaintiff, and the verdict and judgment being for the plaintiff, the defendant appealed.

Defendant's exceptions:

1st. The plaintiff, to sustain the issue joined in this case offered testimony tending to prove that he carried on the business of selling wood and coal by taking orders at No. 2 North street, in Baltimore City; that he had no wood or coal of his own; and that he had been in that business in said city for some ten years.

He then offered testimony tending to prove the allegations of the narr.; he offered no testimony as to his general reputation.

After the plaintiff had closed his case, the defendant offered to produce testimony tending to prove that the plaintiff's reputation for credit was bad, and that his reputation for honesty was bad before the said charge was made against him by the defendant; and for this purpose, witness James Diggs was called, and the following interrogatory was put to him by the defendant:

Do you know the standing of Geo. W. Hurtt for credit and honesty among the men and parties in the same business with him in this commmunity?

To this question, the plaintiff's counsel objected, and the Court sustained the objection, saying that "the gravamen of the action was the false imprisonment of the plaintiff with malice, and without probable cause, and that the averment in the narr., with reference to his good repute, was matter of inducement, and not traversable; the question of character, therefore, was not in issue, and the evidence proposed to be given was inadmissible."

2nd. Plaintiff's First Prayer.--If the jury find that the defendant procured the arrest of the plaintiff upon the charge preferred by him against the plaintiff, under oath, as set forth in the State warrant issued by George McCaffray, a justice of the peace, by virtue of which the plaintiff was arrested and brought before said justice, and compelled to give security for his appearance before Daniel Hagerty, a justice of the peace, to whom his case had been referred where no one appearing to testify against him, he was acquitted and discharged, if the jury find such acquittal--there being no evidence of probable cause, their verdict should be for the plaintiff, and it is competent for the jury to infer malice from the want of probable cause.-- (Granted.)

Plaintiff's Second Prayer.--That if the jury shall find for the plaintiff, they are at liberty to take into consideration all the circumstances of the case, and award such damages as will not only compensate the plaintiff for his expenses in the defence of the criminal trial, and for his loss of time, and for the injury to his feelings person and character by his arrest and imprisonment, but damages as a punishment for such conduct on the part of the defendant.--(Granted.)

To the rulings of the Court, excluding the evidence offered by the defendant, and granting the plaintiff's prayers, the defendant excepted, and the verdict and judgment being against him, he appealed.

The cause was argued before BARTOL, C.J., MILLER, ALVEY and BOWIE, J.

Wm. H. Cowan, for appellant.

F. S. Hoblitzell and R. W. Applegarth, for appellee.

MILLER J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an action for malicious prosecution, brought by the appellee against the appellant. The declaration avers in substance that the defendant falsely and maliciously and without any reasonable or probable cause, charged the plaintiff with having obtained from him four dollars under false pretences, and on this charge, caused him to be arrested, and brought before a justice of the peace, and detained and imprisoned until he was discharged by the magistrate. It then in its allegations respecting damages, avers and charges that by reason of the premises, the plaintiff hath been, and is greatly injured in his credit and reputation, and brought into public scandal, infamy and disgrace; that he has suffered great anxiety and pain of body and mind; that he has been forced to expend large sums of money in defending himself from this accusation and manifesting his innocence; that he has been greatly hindered and...