Poster v. Denison

• Decision Date: 27 January 1896
• Citation: 19 R.I. 361,36 A. 93
• Parties: POSTER et ux. v. DENISON.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

36 A. 93

19 R.I. 361

POSTER et ux.

v. DENISON.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

Jan. 27, 1896.

Action by Wesley M. Foster and wife against James E. Denison for malicious prosecution. Verdict for plaintiffs, and defendant petitions for a new trial. Petition granted.

Albert B. Crafts, for plaintiffs.

James E. Denison, pro se.

MATTESON, C. J. We think that the evidence shows that the joining of Mrs. Foster in the ejectment suit, which it is alleged was malicious, was the result of a confusion in the defendant's mind as to whether Walter P. Foster or Mrs. Foster or both were to be regarded as tenants of the property, rather than that it was caused by any improper motive on the part of the defendant. Though Mrs. Foster claimed at the trial that she acted only as agent for her son, Walter, in the transactions between her and the defendant and his co-trustee relative to the continued occupation of the hotel during October, she chiefly, if not wholly, conducted the negotiations, and used language which would naturally create an impression in the defendant's mind that she regarded herself as a tenant of the property, as well as her son. The note which she sent to the defendant announcing the decision to remain during October, was, "We will try it another month," thus apparently including herself with her son in the agreement. Again, in her answer to cross interrogatory 5 (page 147 of the record), to wit: "What was the understanding? You should pay rent—$75—in advance, according to the old lease?" she replies, "I presume so." We are of the opinion, therefore, that the verdict was against the evidence, both on the ground of...