Malicious Prosecution in the United States

Malicious Prosecution Definition

A judicial proceeding instituted without probable cause (97 U. S. 642; 59 Ind. 500), and with malicious intent (7 111. App. 181; 30 N. Y. 625). While malice may be inferred by the jury from absence of probable cause, the presence of malice in fact is essential. 44 Gal. 144. At common law, the malicious prosecution of a civil action was actionable (Co. Litt. 161) , but in most of the states only the malicious institution of a criminal proceeding is the subject of an action. (4 N. J. Law, 330). This definition of Malicious Prosecution is based on The Cyclopedic Law Dictionary.

For a meaning of it, read Malicious Prosecution in the Legal Dictionary here.

Practical Information

A lawsuit started out of ill will without reason to believe that the charges would be upheld in court. If the malicious prosecution is a criminal proceeding, suit for damages (in U.S. law) may be brought against the prosecuting officer; if a civil action, against the plaintiff. The question of whether there was actual malice is one that a jury answers. (Revised by Ann De Vries, 1982).

As an Intentional Tort

The plaintiff must show that the defendant acted with malice or with some purpose other than bringing the guilty to justice. A mere complaint to the authorities is insufficient to establish the tort, but any official proceeding will support the claim—for example, a warrant for the plaintiff’s arrest. The criminal proceeding must terminate in the plaintiff’s favor in order for his suit to be sustained.

A majority of US courts, though by no means all, permit a suit for wrongful civil proceedings. Civil litigation is usually costly and burdensome, and one who forces another to defend himself against baseless accusations should not be permitted to saddle the one he sues with the costs of defense. However, because, as a matter of public policy, litigation is favored as the means by which legal rights can be vindicated—indeed, the Supreme Court has even ruled that individuals have a constitutional right to litigate—the plaintiff must meet a heavy burden in proving his case. The mere dismissal of the original lawsuit against the plaintiff is not sufficient proof that the suit was unwarranted. The plaintiff in a suit for wrongful civil proceedings must show that the defendant (who was the plaintiff in the original suit) filed the action for an improper purpose and had no reasonable belief that his cause was legally or factually well grounded. (1)