Case Name: EDWARD DAVIS v. STRAND THEATRE CO. et al.
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1923-01-15
Citations: 1 Ohio Law Abs. 168
Docket Number: No. 1247
Parties: EDWARD DAVIS v. STRAND THEATRE CO. et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 1
Pages: 168–168

Head Matter:
No. 116
EDWARD DAVIS v. STRAND THEATRE CO. et al.
Ohio Court of Appeals, Lucas County
No. 1247.
Jan. 15, 1923
MALICIOUS PROSECUTION — (1) Law defined — (2) Errors appearing not prejudicial.
This opinion has not been published elsewhere.
Error to Lucas County Common Pleas
Attorneys — Thad S. Powell and Silas E. Hurin, for plaintiff; Harris & Kaplan, for defendant.

Opinion:
CHITTENDEN, J.
Epitomized Opinion
On the trial of this case below the court directed a verdict in favor of the Strand Co., and the jury rendered a verdict in favor of defendant chamas. Held by the instant court:
1. To sustain an action for malicious prosecution it must affirmatively appear as a part of the case of the person demanding damages that the party sought to be charged was the proximate and efficient cause of maliciously putting the law in motion, or of tortuously. continuing the prosecution.
2. We find that there was no evidence tending to show that either of the defendants was the cause of the arrest and prosecution of plaintiff, and the court should have directed a verdict in favor of both of them. The evidence required the verdict and any errors appearing in the trial were unprejudicial. Judgment of Common Pleas affirmed.