Opinion ID: 448248
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Count 4 judgment against the Whites for malicious prosecution

Text: 48 The malicious prosecution claim had been removed from the case before trial. Because this was the only claim against the Whites, they were entitled to be dismissed from the case. 49 The parties agreed to an initial pretrial stipulation in March 1982. In July the LeSavages proposed a new pretrial stipulation to which the defendants objected. At the second pretrial conference, in July, the magistrate stated that if the parties could not agree on a new stipulation then the original pretrial stipulation would be binding. The LeSavages gave notice that they intended to sue the Whites for malicious prosecution. The Whites objected, asserting that at the earlier pretrial conference they had given up the right to obtain evidence from Michigan, the LeSavages' previous home, a right they would not have given up if they had known that they would be sued for malicious prosecution. After the conference the Whites gave the LeSavages a 28 item memo stating their demands if the LeSavages would not drop the malicious prosecution claim. Included was a threat to counter-sue. 50 A third pretrial conference was held in August at which the LeSavages agreed to delete from their suggested new pretrial order the phrase that the Defendants White by their actions, caused the malicious prosecution of the Plaintiff, Bernard LeSavage, and substitute that [t]he Defendants White knowingly gave false information to Detective Carpenter which was a proximate cause of the arrest of Bernard LeSavage. 51 At trial, in a bench conference, the trial judge tried to determine what claims were being made. He was furnished with a photocopy of a marked up pretrial stipulation on which some of the deletions could not be read instead of a copy of an amended and clear version. The court ruled that the malicious prosecution claim was properly before the court and the issue was tried over the Whites' objection. 52 The LeSavages agreed to remove the issue of malicious prosecution, and it should not have been tried. Because of our resolution of this issue we need not reach the posttrial issues regarding enforcement of the LeSavages' judgment against the Whites.