Priest v. Groover, 72--871
| Decision Date | 06 February 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 72--871,72--871 |
| Citation | 289 So.2d 767 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Frances B. PRIEST, Appellant, v. C. A. GROOVER and the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc., a Maryland corporation licensed to do business in Florida, Appellees. |
Cheves & Hazen, Venice, for appellant.
H. Glenn Waddell, of Shackleford, Farrior, Stallings & Evans, Tampa, for appellees.
This is an appeal from a final judgment entered on a directed verdict for the defendants-appellees in a malicious prosecution action at the close of plaintiff-appellant's case.
Appellant was the maker of a check payable to one Paul Majeau. On the face of the check was a notation 'on account for 2 Zenith T.V.'s color sets.' Paul Majeau presented the check to the appellee, C. A. Groover, manager of one of the appellee's supermarkets for a period of eight and one-half years. Groover cashed the check for Majeau who had purchased some groceries in the A & P. Subsequently the check was returned to the A & P marked 'Payment stopped.'
At this point there is a conflict in the facts as to whether or not Groover called Mrs. Priest to inquire into whether or not she would honor the check. Mrs. Priest testified that she had never spoken to Mr. Groover concerning the check. Mr. Groover testified that he had called and spoke to a lady who identified herself as Mrs. Priest and inquired of the check.
Mr. Groover then took the check to the Justice of the Peace and disclosed to him all of the facts surrounding the check. The Justice of the Peace told Mr. Groover that his court would handle it, at which time Mr. Groover signed an affidavit which stated that Mrs. Priest knew the check was worthless and published it with intent to injure and defraud. A warrant was issued upon which Mrs. Priest was arrested. The Justice of the Peace dismissed the charge when he learned from Mrs. Priest that payment was stopped because Majeau did not deliver the television sets.
In the instant case the trial judge ruled that Mrs. Priest had not carried the burden of proving two essential elements necessary to prevail in a malicious prosecution action, to wit: the absence of probable cause for such prosecution and the presence of malice.
It is well settled that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cazares v. Church of Scientology of California, Inc.
...Fee, Parker & Lloyd v. Sullivan, 379 So.2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (appeal after final judgment and jury verdict); Priest v. Groover, 289 So.2d 767 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (directed verdict); Liabos v. Harman, 215 So.2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968) (summary judgment).2 Although the summary judgment wa......
-
Carnley v. Wilson
...908 (Fla.App.1966), Liabos v. Harman, 215 So.2d 487 (Fla.App.1968), Kilburn v. Davenport, 286 So.2d 241 (Fla.App.1973), Priest v. Groover, 289 So.2d 767 (Fla.App.1974), and Hunter v. First Baptist Church, Inc., 294 So.2d 355 The facts in the case before this Court are not is dispute and the......
-
Owens v. City of Pensacola
...officers had probable cause to believe that an offense had been committed. We agree with appellant and reverse. In Priest v. Grover, 289 So.2d 767 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1974) an appeal from a final judgment entered on a directed verdict for the defendant in a malicious prosecution action, our siste......
-
Rodgers v. W.T. Grant Co.
...So.2d 101 (1 Fla.App.1960); Azrikan v. O'Brien, 173 So.2d 711 (3 Fla.App.1965); Adams v. Whitfield, 290 So.2d 49 (Fla.1974); and Priest v. Groover, 289 So.2d 767 (2 Fla.App.1974).5 Thompson v. Taylor, 183 So.2d 16 (1 Fla.App.1966).6 Gallucci v. Milavic, 100 So.2d 375 (Fla.1958).7 Great Atla......