Case ID: or_277/html/0233-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued October 26, 1976,
    affirmed February 17, 1977
    MONOGIOS, Appellant, v. PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Respondent.
    
    (No. 10709, SC P-2492)
    560 P2d 274
    Walter T. Aho, Molalla, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief was James E. Bernstein, Oregon City.
    George H. Corey, of Corey, Byler & Rew, Pendleton, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief was Marcus A. Wood, of Rives, Bonyhadi & Drummond, Portland.
    Before Denecke, Chief Justice, and O’Connell, Holman, Howell and Bryson, Justices.
    PER CURIAM.
    
      
       O’Connell, J., term expired January 3, 1977.
    
    
      
      Holman, J., did not participate in the decision in this case.
    
   PER CURIAM.

The controlling issue in this malicious prosecution case is whether the defendant had probable cause to institute criminal proceedings as a matter of law. The law is as stated in Varner v. Hoffer, 267 Or 175, 515 P2d 920 (1973). Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to plaintiff, we find that the defendant reasonably believed the plaintiff acted in a manner which constitutes the offense of criminal mischief in the second degree.

Affirmed.