Case ID: nys_144/html/0952-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DUCKETT v. HOFFERBERTH.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    December 26, 1913.)
    Appeal and Ebbob (§ 1171)—Nominal Verdict.
    Where the complaint in tort should have been dismissed, the court, on the appeal of plaintiff from a judgment for one cent, will not reverse the judgment.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, s,ee Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 4546-4554; Dec. Dig. § 1171.*]
    
      Appeal from Trial Term, New York County.
    Action by Alfred W. Duckett against Charles i\ Hofferberth. From a judgment granting insufficient relief, and from an order denying a new trial, plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    See, also, 143 N. Y. Supp. 1114.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, LAUGH-LIN, DOWLING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.
    Joseph M. Herzberg, of New York City, for appellant.
    Samuel H. Evins, of New York City, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

We think that the plaintiff failed to sustain a cause of action for malicious prosecution. So far as any prosecution was instituted by the defendant, the plaintiff failed to show a lack of probable cause, and the complaint should have been dismissed. Under such circumstances, the court is not required to reverse a verdict for the plaintiff for one cent.

The judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.