Monroe v. Maples

| Conn. | Mar 15, 1793

If this is to be considered as an action upon the case for a malicious prosecution, the plaintiff hath not shown that he was acquitted, but that he was convicted. If as an action for tbe injury done bim by tbe defendants’ false swearing and perjury, it is not brought upon tbe statute, nor witbin tbe time limited by law; and it would be of dangerous consequence to admit actions of tbis nature to be against witnesses after so great a lapse of time.