Thomas v. Winters
| Decision Date | 06 June 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 22.,22. |
| Citation | 242 N.W. 780,258 Mich. 429 |
| Parties | THOMAS v. WINTERS et al. BIRD v. SAME. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; Homer Ferguson, Judge.
Separate actions by Lewis Thomas and by Elsie Bird against Charles C. Winters and another, consolidated and tried together. Judgments in favor of the plaintiffs, and the defendants appeal.
Reversed without a new trial.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Munro, Powell, Wing & Covey, of Detroit (Leo Wing, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellants.
Angell, Turner, Dyer & Meek, of Detroit, for appellees.
These two actions in malicious prosecution were consolidated and tried without a jury. Plaintiffs had judgments. Defendants have appealed. There must be reversal, as probable cause for making the complaint is established.
Anderson bought an automobile from Low Dollar Car Market. The paper arising upon the sale was discounted with defendant Central Discount Company, a corporation. Anderson reported to police department of the city of Lansing that the car had been stolen. Later the following letter was written and received:
‘City of Lansing Police Department
‘Alfred Seymour, Chief.
‘Lansing, Michigan, March 2, 1927.
‘Low Dollar Car Market, 2773 Cass Ave., Detroit, Michigan.
‘We are informed you have an interest in this car and writting you to see if you care to send someone to Lansing to obtain warrant for these parties.
‘Please let us hear from you at once about this.
‘Chief of Police.’
The letter was forwarded to Central Discount Company, who did not at once become active. It was protected by insurance. Then the Lansing police department called Central Discount Company by telephone, of which:
‘
Winters was president of the Central Discount Company . He went accordingly to the office of the chief of said police and talked with secretary of the chief and other police officers, who said they knew where the car was and who had stolen it, and told him to make complaint, and:
A police officer conducted Winters to the office of the assistant prosecuting attorney of the county, to whom the officer stated in outline the facts, and the attorney O. K.'d the complaint. Winters said little or nothing. The plaintiffs were arrested and later released.
As to what is probable cause, we quote syllabi of Wilson v. Bowen, 64 Mich. 133, 31 N. W. 81:
‘To constitute probable cause, there must be such reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant an ordinarily cautious man in the belief that the person arrested is guilty of the offense charged.
‘A person may have ‘probable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Meehan v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
... ... Decided Feb. 6, 1989 ... Released for Publication March 15, 1989 ... Page 714 ... [174 MICHAPP 540] Ronald R. Gold and Thomas C. Taylor, Southfield, for plaintiff-appellee ... Cross, Wrock, Miller & Vieson by W. Robert [174 MICHAPP 541] Chandler and Jesse ... This Court in Koski v. Vohs, 137 Mich.App. 491, 514, 358 N.W.2d 620 (1984), quoted Thomas v. Winters, 258 Mich. [174 MICHAPP 562] 429, 432, 242 N.W. 780 (1932), wherein the Court defined probable cause: ... " 'To constitute probable ... ...
-
Koski v. Vohs
...my opinion, there was. In Gooch v. Wachowiak, supra, pp 351-352, 89 N.W.2d 496, the Supreme Court stated, quoting Thomas v. Winters, 258 Mich. 429, 432, 242 N.W. 780 (1932): " 'As to what is probable cause, we quote syllabi of Wilson v Bowen, 64 Mich 133 [31 NW 81 (1887) " ' "To constitute ......
-
Gooch v. Wachowiak, 64
...224, 166 N.W. 894; Modla v. Miller, supra; Merriam v. Continental Motors Corporation, 339 Mich. 546, 64 N.W.2d 691. In Thomas v. Winters, 258 Mich. 429, 242 N.W. 780, 781, we 'As to what is probable cause, we quote syllabi of Wilson v. Bowen, 64 Mich. 133, 31 N.W. 81: "To constitute probabl......
- Baer v. Hespel, 17.