Pallares v. Seinar
407 S.C. 359
S.C.2014Background
- Pallares sued neighbors Seinar and Maseng alleging a campaign of harassment through code complaints, animal-nuisance complaints, a petition for mental evaluation, and restraining-order requests, asserting malicious prosecution, abuse of process, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment for defendants on malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and civil conspiracy; denied summary judgment on invasion of privacy and IIED.
- Key factual record: multiple documented city/animal-control incident reports of barking dogs and City inspection notices for property/code violations; defendants filed a probate petition seeking a mental evaluation, using a form that listed them as "neighbors."
- The probate examiners concluded Pallares was not mentally ill and the petition was dismissed; some municipal code matters were abated by Pallares and not prosecuted.
- Pallares appealed; the Supreme Court reviewed summary-judgment rulings and affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Malicious prosecution — whether defendants lacked probable cause and acted with malice in initiating complaints | Pallares: complaints were groundless and motivated by malice to drive her from the neighborhood | Defendants: incident reports and city warnings show they honestly believed there was probable cause for animal and code complaints | Affirmed — summary judgment for defendants; record shows probable cause for at least some complaints, defeating malicious prosecution claim as a matter of law |
| Abuse of process — whether defendants used legal process for an ulterior purpose and committed a willful act outside regular process | Pallares: defendants used complaints (including mental-commitment petition) primarily to force her out of the neighborhood; neighbor affidavit supports motive | Defendants: complaints and code/animal processes were properly carried to authorized conclusion; no willful improper act | Reversed — summary judgment improper; genuine issues of material fact exist (notably the improper mental-commitment petition and whether that constituted an unauthorized willful act and ulterior purpose) |
| Scope of permissible petitioners for involuntary mental evaluation — whether neighbors may be "interested persons" or "nearest friends" entitled to petition | Pallares: neighbors lacked statutory authority, so filing was unauthorized, supporting abuse of process | Defendants (and concurrence): neighbors may sometimes qualify as "nearest friend"; issue not fully litigated below | Court: majority treated petition as facially outside statutory categories (petition listed "neighbors") and found material fact question; concurrence would constrain review and limit claim to mental-commitment issue |
| Do procedural immunities (Noerr-Pennington, judicial immunity) bar abuse-of-process claim? | Pallares: N/A — argues tort claims valid | Defendants: asserted Noerr-Pennington and judicial immunity as defenses | Court: declined to adopt Noerr-Pennington in South Carolina and found these defenses unavailing to bar abuse-of-process claim at summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Law v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 629 S.E.2d 642 (2006) (elements of malicious prosecution and requirement to prove malice and lack of probable cause)
- Broyhill v. Resolution Mgmt. Consultants, Inc., 401 S.C. 466, 736 S.E.2d 867 (Ct.App.2012) (probable cause in civil-prosecution context; existence of probable cause as to any claim defeats malicious prosecution)
- Eaves v. Broad River Elec. Coop., Inc., 277 S.C. 475, 289 S.E.2d 414 (1982) (focus on prosecutor’s honest belief of facts for probable cause)
- Hainer v. Am. Med. Int'l, Inc., 328 S.C. 128, 492 S.E.2d 103 (1997) (abuse of process elements; willful act defined)
- Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 567 S.E.2d 251 (Ct.App.2002) (abuse of process—definition of "process" and limits on bad-motive allegations)
- Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 249 S.C. 206, 153 S.E.2d 693 (1967) (abuse of process focuses on misuse of process for ends not lawfully warranted)