102 So. 3d 1232
Miss. Ct. App.2012Background
- Hyer filed a criminal complaint for simple assault against Caruso in Amite County Justice Court on December 16, 2009.
- After a January 6, 2010 hearing, the case was remanded to the file.
- Caruso filed a circuit court complaint on July 23, 2010 alleging false arrest, malicious prosecution, and related torts.
- A jury awarded Caruso $15,000 in actual damages for malicious prosecution on June 9, 2011.
- Hyer appeals, arguing there was insufficient evidence of malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress, but the circuit court’s judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Malicious prosecution elements met | Hyer argues Caruso failed to prove lack of probable cause and damages. | Caruso asserts all required elements were shown by the record. | Sufficient evidence supported all elements. |
| Termination in Caruso's favor | Hyer contends remand to file negates favorable termination. | Termination is satisfied when charges are abandoned or not pursued. | Remand to the file constitutes favorable termination. |
| Malice in initiating proceedings | Hyer claims lack of malice. | Evidence of a contentious history and threats supports malice. | Jury could infer malice from the record. |
| Lack of probable cause | Hyer asserts no reasonable belief of Caruso's guilt. | Caruso argues Hyer’s belief lacked reasonable grounds; trial evidence supports lack of probable cause. | Reasonable jurors could find lack of probable cause. |
| Damages from malicious prosecution | Caruso suffered reputational harm and mental distress from arrest. | No need for physical injury to recover damages. | Arrest and related consequences supported damages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Royal Oil Co. v. Wells, 500 So.2d 439 (Miss. 1986) (termination can occur even without a finding of innocence)
- Joiner Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Principal Cas. Ins. Co., 684 So.2d 1242 (Miss. 1996) (final termination not always required)
- Strong v. Nicholson, 580 So.2d 1288 (Miss. 1991) (malice in malicious prosecution is improper purpose; evidence may show malice)
- Perkins v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 46 So.3d 839 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (elements of malicious prosecution; probable cause and damages)
- White v. Stewman, 932 So.2d 27 (Miss. 2006) (appellate review standard for conflict between verdict and evidence)
- Robley v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Miss., 935 So.2d 990 (Miss. 2006) (standard for evidence review and inferences in malicious-prosecution cases)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Littleton, 822 So.2d 1056 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (de novo standard for denial of JNOV or directed verdict)