Opinion ID: 2266700
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: the conspiracy counts

Text: The Greens' last redoubt is in their hope that we will somehow find error with the trial judge for directing the verdict against them on the six counts reciting conspiracies to commit assault and battery, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and several trespasses. We do not think that the law of civil conspiracy or the facts of this case will accommodate them. A civil conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons by an agreement or understanding to accomplish an unlawful act or to use unlawful means to accomplish an act not in itself illegal, with the further requirement that the act or the means employed must result in damages to the plaintiff. Bachrach v. United Cooperative, 181 Md. 315, 29 A.2d 822 (1943); Kimball v. Harman, 34 Md. 407 (1871). The appellants' basic contention is that the unlawful objective of this conspiracy was to dispossess them of their property. The short answer to this is that the jury found that neither the Sanitary Commission nor the other defendants unlawfully entered upon or interfered with the Greens' property. If, as the jury determined, the act of taking possession of the property in order to lay the pipe was lawful, it obviously follows that a confederation or combination to perform this act could not have been unlawful either. A similar result follows from the jury determination that no defendant was guilty of false imprisonment or malicious prosecution. Bachrach v. United Cooperative, supra . However, as we have indicated, there can be a conspiracy to utilize unlawful means to achieve an otherwise legal objective. Was there a conspiracy, then, in regard to the assault charges, the two offenses the jury determined were unlawfully committed during the course of clearing the barricade? Viewing the testimony in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs, we fail to see any evidence from which the jury could have concluded that either of these offenses came about as a result of an agreement or combination. On the contrary, all indications are that these acts of violence were individual and spontaneous eruptions which occurred primarily in response to Mr. Green's own conduct. Judgments affirmed. Costs to be paid by the appellants.