Case ID: ga-app_21/html/0634-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Luke, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

8927.
    Glass v. Brittain Brothers Company.
    Decided January 22, 1918.
    Action for damages; from city court of Floyd county — Judge Nunnally. May 8, 1917.
    
      B. J. Mayer, Harris & Harris, for plaintiff.
    
      Wesley Shropshire, McHenry & Porter, for defendant.
   Luke, J.

Where it is alleged in a suit for damages for malicious prosecution that the prosecution was instituted by the agent of the defendant, it must be proved that the agent was at that time acting within the scope of his employment or at the direction or command of his principal. The plaintiff having failed to prove his case as laid in his petition, the court did not commit error in granting a nonsuit.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and'Jenkins, J., concur.