Phillips v. Village of Kalamazoo
| Decision Date | 06 March 1884 |
| Citation | 53 Mich. 33,18 N.W. 547 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | PHILLIPS v. VILLAGE OF KALAMAZOO. |
As a rule a conviction before a magistrate, even though reversed on appeal, is a bar to a suit for malicious prosecution, and if a party relies on an exception to the rule he must state the facts constituting the exception.
This court will not decide questions in the record which are not necessary to the final determination of the suit, however desirable it may be to counsel in particular instances.
Error to Kalamazoo.
Hampden Kelsey, for plaintiff and appellant.
R.F Hill and H.F. Severens, for defendant.
The plaintiff brought an action for malicious prosecution against the defendant. In his declaration he alleged that the defendant wrongfully and maliciously caused him to be prosecuted and arrested for the violation of a village ordinance prohibiting peddling without a license in the village; that he was tried before a justice of the peace and convicted, and on appeal to the circuit court he was acquitted and discharged. The declaration contains no averment that his conviction before the justice was procured by any fraud, perjury, or subornation, and he does not show that his case comes within any of the exceptions applicable to cases where a correction has been had. Hence, by his own showing, there was not a want of probable cause. The declaration contained three counts. The defendant demurred to the first, and pleaded the general issue to the second and third counts. The plaintiff entered a voluntary discontinuance upon the second and third counts, and joined in demurrer on the first count. The circuit judge sustained the demurrer and rendered judgment for the defendant.
Counsel for the defendant points out the manifest defect in the declaration with reference to the conviction before the justice, but in addition requests us to pass upon the question of liability independently of this insuperable defect, on account of the important question of liability, on general principles of municipal law, involved in a complaint of this kind. It would be departing from our customary practice to express an opinion upon questions in the record which are not necessary for a final determination of the suit, however desirable it might be for counsel in particular instances to have us do so. As a general rule, a conviction before a magistrate is a bar to a malicious prosecution, and if the party...
To continue reading
Request your trial