Opinion ID: 2512331
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: examining the tort of malicious prosecution

Text: Inasmuch as the tort of malicious defense is derived from the tort of malicious prosecution, it is necessary to elaborate on the well-established tort of malicious prosecution. The tort of malicious prosecution permits a plaintiff to recover when the plaintiff shows that the prior proceedings were (1) terminated in the plaintiff's favor, (2) initiated without probable cause, and (3) initiated with malice. Brodie v. Hawai`i Auto. Retail Gasoline Dealers Ass'n, Inc., 2 Haw.App. 316, 318, 631 P.2d 600, 602 (1981), rev'd on other grounds, 65 Haw. 598, 655 P.2d 863 (1982) (citing Prosser, Law of Torts  120, at 850-56); Wong, 111 Hawai`i 462, 478, 143 P.3d 1, 17 (2006) (citing Reed v. City and County of Honolulu, 76 Hawai`i 219, 230, 873 P.2d 98, 109 (1994)). Because a malicious prosecution claim is triggered when the unsuccessful party initiated the lawsuit, [t]he defendant is not liable for proceedings unless he has initiated them. Prosser and Keeton on Torts  120, at 893; Wilkinson v. Shoney's, Inc., 269 Kan. 194, 4 P.3d 1149, 1158-59 (2000) (None of the examples in the comments to [Restatement (Second) of Torts (Restatement)  674 (1977), regarding Wrongful use of Civil Proceedings,] involve liability attaching to one who defends in an action without asserting a counterclaim or cross-claim.); see also concurring and dissenting opinion (Dissent) at ___, 198 P.3d at 693. Prosser and Keeton on Torts further discussed the extent of a defendant's right to a malicious prosecution claim, as follows: [T]he mere assertion of an affirmative defense is not initiation of a claim, so long as the defendant does not go further and demand damages or other relief. A bad faith defense, however, may subject the defendant to liability for attorneys' fees even when no statute so provides and this may serve to accomplish most of the purposes of a malicious prosecution action. Id. (Footnotes omitted.) The distinction between a plaintiff and defendant's right to claim malicious prosecution appears designed to address the harms inflicted upon a party when a plaintiff initiated a lawsuit against it with malice and without probable cause. The tort of malicious prosecution protects [t]he interest in freedom from unjustifiable litigation. Prosser and Keeton on Torts,  119, at 870. The tort serves to compensate a party sued in a malicious and meritless legal action for his or her financial costs, as well as psychic damage from the shock of the unfounded allegations in the pleadings[] and ... the loss of his reputation in the community as a result of the filing and notoriety of the base allegations in the pleadings which are public records. Stanley v. Superior Court, 130 Cal. App.3d 460, 468, 181 Cal.Rptr. 878, 882 (1982) (citing Bertero v. Nat'l Gen. Corp., 13 Cal.3d 43, 50-51, 529 P.2d 608, 614, 181 Cal.Rptr. 184, 190 (1974); see also Hewitt v. Rice, 119 P.3d 541, 544 (Colo.Ct.App.2004) (The purpose of an action for malicious prosecution is to compensate a person sued in a malicious and baseless legal action for attorney fees, costs, psychic damage, and loss of reputation.)). As the party haled into court in a meritless and malicious suit, the plaintiff's interests have been invaded, the plaintiff's reputation has suffered, and the plaintiff has been put to the expense of defense. Prosser and Keeton on Torts,  119, at 871. Specifically, wrongful civil suits can destroy a livelihood, devastate a business, or chill debate on public issues. Dan B. Dobbs, The Law of Torts,  436, at 1228 (2001); see also Bertero, 13 Cal.3d at 50-51, 529 P.2d at 614, 118 Cal.Rptr. at 190 (The individual is harmed because he is compelled to defend against a fabricated claim which not only subjects him to the panoply of psychological pressures most civil defendants suffer, but also to the additional stress of attempting to resist a suit commenced out of spite or ill will, often magnified by slanderous allegations in the pleadings.); White v. Frank, 855 F.2d 956, 960 n. 3 (2nd Cir.1988) (noting that the tort of malicious prosecution provides redress, though only under tightly guarded circumstances, from unjustifiable litigation in order to protect the plaintiff's financial interests and interest in bodily freedom, as well as his reputation. (citing Fowler V. Harper, Malicious Prosecution, False Imprisonment and Defamation, 15 Tex. L.Rev. 157, 168-70 (1937))); cf. Ellis v. Harland Bartholomew and Assocs., 1 Haw.App. 420, 428, 620 P.2d 744, 750 (1980) (observing, in the context of the dismissal of a civil proceeding, that [s]omewhere along the line, the rights of the defendant to be free from costly and harassing litigation must be considered. So too must the time and energies of our courts and the rights of would be litigants awaiting their turns to have other matters resolved. (quoting Von Poppenheim v. Portland Boxing and Wrestling Comm'n, 442 F.2d 1047, 1054 (9th Cir.1971))). The tort of malicious prosecution acknowledges the special, particular harms that a defendant suffers when a lawsuit is maliciously initiated against it. By concluding that a plaintiff and defendant may suffer from the same harms as a result of groundless claims, see dissent at ___, 198 P.3d at 696, the dissent ignores the requirement that the lawsuit was initiated against the defendant and trivializes the harms that the plaintiff inflicts onto the defendant by initiating a baseless lawsuit.