Gonzalez v. Chicago Steel Rule Die & Fabricators Co., No. 81-2697
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | SULLIVAN |
| Citation | 62 Ill.Dec. 577,436 N.E.2d 603,106 Ill.App.3d 848 |
| Parties | , 62 Ill.Dec. 577 German GONZALEZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHICAGO STEEL RULE DIE & FABRICATORS CO., an Illinois corporation, Samuel Guanci, Jr., Gerald Guanci and Philip Kaporis, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Decision Date | 14 May 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-2697 |
Page 603
v.
CHICAGO STEEL RULE DIE & FABRICATORS CO., an Illinois
corporation, Samuel Guanci, Jr., Gerald Guanci and
Philip Kaporis, Defendants-Appellants.
Rehearing Denied June 18, 1982.
Page 604
[62 Ill.Dec. 578] Malato & Stein, P. C., Chicago, for defendants-appellants; Stephen H. Malato and Robert S. Minetz, Chicago, of counsel.
S. M. Del Principe, Chicago, for plaintiff-appellee.
SULLIVAN, Presiding Justice:
We granted defendants' application for leave to appeal under Rule 308 (Ill.Rev.Stat.1979, ch. 110A, par. 308) after the court denied their motion to dismiss Count II of plaintiff's amended complaint purporting to state a cause of action for malicious prosecution predicated upon a criminal proceeding.
[106 Ill.App.3d 849] Count II 1 alleged in substance that defendants falsely and maliciously filed a complaint with the State's Attorney that plaintiff had committed the crime of criminal trespass to land, and as a result he was arrested, brought to trial, and eventually found not guilty. As to damages, Count II alleged generally that plaintiff was injured in his credit and reputation, was brought into public disgrace, incurred expense in defending himself, and was prevented from attending to his regular affairs and duties.
Defendants moved to dismiss Count II on the basis that plaintiff failed to allege the necessary element of "special injury." The court, in denying the motion, found that special damages need not be alleged, and certified the following question for review: "Whether special damages are a necessary element of a malicious prosecution action predicated upon the institution of criminal proceedings."
In Illinois, a complaint in an action for malicious prosecution must allege facts showing " '(1) the commencement or continuance of an original criminal or civil judicial proceeding by the defendant; (2) the termination of the proceeding in favor of the plaintiff; (3) the absence of probable cause for such proceeding; (4) the presence of malice; and (5) damages resulting to the plaintiff.' (Ritchey v. Maksin (1978), 71 Ill.2d 470, 475, 17 Ill.Dec. 662, 376 N.E.2d 991.)" (Joiner v. Benton Community Bank (1980), 82 Ill.2d 40, 45, 44 Ill.Dec. 260, 263, 411 N.E.2d 229, 232.) However, in malicious prosecution actions based on civil proceedings, Illinois is among the minority following the "English rule" requiring a complainant to additionally allege and prove "special injury" (Annot., 35 A.L.R.3d 651, 653 (1971), and in recent years the Illinois courts have consistently affirmed the special injury element in civil malicious prosecution actions (Bank of Lyons v. Schultz (1980), 78 Ill.2d 235, 35 Ill.Dec. 758, 399 N.E.2d 1286; Davis v. Ruff (1980), 83 Ill.App.3d 651, 39 Ill.Dec. 21, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Nelson, No. 80-0063
...1005-4-1(c) and we express no opinion as to whether the plain error rule would otherwise permit us to reach the merits of this issue. [106 Ill.App.3d 848] For the reasons contained herein we affirm defendants' convictions but reduce their sentences on the armed robbery counts from 20 years ......
-
Beverly Bank v. Alsip Bank, No. 80-2900
...waive his legal right to insist on strict performance of the covenants of a contract (Stewart v. Meyers (C.A.Ill.1965), Page 603 [62 Ill.Dec. 577] 353 F.2d 691; Chicago Sugar Co. v. American Sugar Refining Co. (C.A.Ill.1949), 176 F.2d 1, cert. denied, 338 U.S. 948, 70 S.Ct. 486, 94 L.Ed. 58......
-
Anderson v. CONTINENTAL ILL. NAT. BANK & TRUST, No. 83 C 0012.
...arrest existed, he cannot prevail on his claim of malicious prosecution. Gonzalez v. Chicago Steel Rule Die & Fabricators Co., 106 Ill.App.3d 848, 849, 62 Ill.Dec. 577, 578, 436 N.E.2d 603, 604 577 F. Supp. 876 (1982). Continental, moreover, cannot be liable for false arrest, since simply p......
-
Voga v. Nelson, Gen. No. 82-748
...of criminal proceedings, no showing of special injury is required. (Gonzalez v. Chicago Steel Rule Die & Fabricators Co. (1982), 106 Ill.App.3d 848, 850, 62 Ill.Dec. 577, 436 N.E.2d 603.) The instant case is a malicious prosecution action based on the institution of a criminal prosecution f......
-
People v. Nelson, No. 80-0063
...1005-4-1(c) and we express no opinion as to whether the plain error rule would otherwise permit us to reach the merits of this issue. [106 Ill.App.3d 848] For the reasons contained herein we affirm defendants' convictions but reduce their sentences on the armed robbery counts from 20 years ......
-
Beverly Bank v. Alsip Bank, No. 80-2900
...waive his legal right to insist on strict performance of the covenants of a contract (Stewart v. Meyers (C.A.Ill.1965), Page 603 [62 Ill.Dec. 577] 353 F.2d 691; Chicago Sugar Co. v. American Sugar Refining Co. (C.A.Ill.1949), 176 F.2d 1, cert. denied, 338 U.S. 948, 70 S.Ct. 486, 94 L.Ed. 58......
-
Anderson v. CONTINENTAL ILL. NAT. BANK & TRUST, No. 83 C 0012.
...arrest existed, he cannot prevail on his claim of malicious prosecution. Gonzalez v. Chicago Steel Rule Die & Fabricators Co., 106 Ill.App.3d 848, 849, 62 Ill.Dec. 577, 578, 436 N.E.2d 603, 604 577 F. Supp. 876 (1982). Continental, moreover, cannot be liable for false arrest, since simply p......
-
Voga v. Nelson, Gen. No. 82-748
...of criminal proceedings, no showing of special injury is required. (Gonzalez v. Chicago Steel Rule Die & Fabricators Co. (1982), 106 Ill.App.3d 848, 850, 62 Ill.Dec. 577, 436 N.E.2d 603.) The instant case is a malicious prosecution action based on the institution of a criminal prosecution f......