Majority
Headnote
Malicious Prosecution—Probable Cause. Where pieces of property belonging to different owners are separated by a fence sufficient to show the boundary line, and one of the owners, in order to. obtain a view, has trees on the land of the other cut down, a criminal prosecution by the latter of the former, and of his servant, who did the cutting, is not without probable cause.We are not able to find any evidence from which the jury could properly say that the prosecution before the justice of the peace was malicious, or that it was without probable cause. On the contrary, we ate disposed to share the surprise expressed by the circuit judge that the accused persons were not held for trial. Where a fence six feet high is standing along a boundary line, the fact that gaps existed in some places would scarcely explain how a careful man could so far trespass upon his neighbor’s land as was done in this case. It is not surprising that the criminal charge was made, for there was apparently a reasonable ground to sustain it. Malice not being shown, and probable cause existing, the nonsuit was rightly granted.
Judgment affirmed.