From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacFawn v. Kresler

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 2, 1996
88 N.Y.2d 859 (N.Y. 1996)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that a dismissal of the information without prejudice for facial insufficiency may not serve as the basis for a malicious prosecution claim

Summary of this case from Russell v. Journal News
See 16 Summaries

Opinion

Argued March 20, 1996

Decided May 2, 1996

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Lawrence E. Kahn, J.

Eugene R. Spada, Albany, for appellant. Cravath, Swaine Moore, New York City ( Timothy J. Coleman, Rowan D. Wilson and Robert P. Pongetti of counsel), for respondents.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff in this malicious prosecution action bears the burden of establishing that the underlying criminal action terminated favorably to him ( Ward v Silverberg, 85 N.Y.2d 993; Hollender v Trump Vil. Coop., 58 N.Y.2d 420; Martin v City of Albany, 42 N.Y.2d 13, 16). A criminal proceeding terminates favorably to the accused, for purposes of a malicious prosecution claim, when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence ( see, Hollender v Trump Vil. Coop., supra; Halberstadt v New York Life Ins. Co., 194 N.Y. 1).

In this case the information charging plaintiff with attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, theft of a credit card (Penal Law § 155.30; § 110.00), was dismissed by the court because it concluded that the facts alleged by the People were not legally sufficient to support the charge (CPL 170.30 [a]; 170.35 [1] [a]). The People were at liberty to amend the information to correct the deficiency but did not do so. Neither did they refile the charge as they could have ( see, People v Nuccio, 78 N.Y.2d 102, 104).

Manifestly, the criminal action was disposed of on procedural grounds. The court did not reach the merits and the question of plaintiff's guilt or innocence remained unanswered after the court dismissed the information. Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint in the civil action failed to state a cause of action for malicious prosecution and it was properly dismissed.

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SIMONS, TITONE, BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE and CIPARICK concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Summaries of

MacFawn v. Kresler

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 2, 1996
88 N.Y.2d 859 (N.Y. 1996)

holding that a dismissal of the information without prejudice for facial insufficiency may not serve as the basis for a malicious prosecution claim

Summary of this case from Russell v. Journal News

holding that plaintiff failed to state claim for malicious prosecution where the court did not reach the merits and the question of plaintiff's guilt or innocence, but instead dismissed case on procedural grounds

Summary of this case from Laboy v. Cnty. of Ontario

holding that action could not form the basis of a malicious prosecution claim where criminal information was dismissed as insufficient to support the charges, without prejudice, and the prosecutors did not amend or refile

Summary of this case from McGee v. Doe

holding that action could not form the basis of a malicious prosecution claim where criminal information was dismissed as insufficient to support the charges, without prejudice, and the prosecutors did not amend or refile

Summary of this case from McGee v. Doe

explaining that “[m]anifestly, the criminal action was disposed of on procedural grounds [t]he court did not reach the merits”

Summary of this case from Liberty Synergistics, Inc. v. Microflo Ltd.

In MacFawn v. Kresler, 88 N.Y.2d 859, 860 (1996), for example, the criminal information "was dismissed by the court because it concluded that the facts alleged by the People were not legally sufficient to support the charge."

Summary of this case from Wood v. Town of East Hampton

In MacFawn, 88 N.Y.2d at 860, the New York Court of Appeals "ignored" the abandonment prong and "recast" Halberstadt to hold that a favorable termination exists only where the "final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence."

Summary of this case from Morgan v. Nassau County

explaining that, in dismissing information pursuant to § 170.30, "[t]he court did not reach the merits and the question of plaintiff's guilt or innocence remained unanswered after the court dismissed the information. Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint in the civil action failed to state a cause of action for malicious prosecution and it was properly dismissed"

Summary of this case from Davenport v. County of Suffolk

explaining that a favorable termination happens "when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence"

Summary of this case from Ferlito v. City of Oswego

stating that a "criminal proceeding terminates favorably to the accused, for purposes of a malicious prosecution claim, when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence"

Summary of this case from Richardson v. City of New York

explaining that a favorable termination happens "when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence"

Summary of this case from Ahern v. City of Syracuse

explaining that a favorable termination happens "when the final disposition of the proceeding involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence"

Summary of this case from Merritt v. Dunlap

In MacFawn v. Kresler, 88 N.Y.2d 859, 666 N.E.2d 1359, 644 N.Y.S.2d 486 (1996), the information charging plaintiff with attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, theft of a credit card, was dismissed by the court because it concluded that the facts alleged by the People were not legally sufficient to support the charge.

Summary of this case from Mason v. Town of New Paltz Police Dept.

In MacFawn v. Kresler, 88 N.Y.2d 859, 860, 666 N.E.2d 1359, 1360, 644 N.Y.S.2d 486, 487 (1996), the New York Court of Appeals held that the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for malicious prosecution arising from the dismissal of a criminal complaint pursuant to N.Y.Crim. P.L. §§ 170.30[1][a] and 170.35[1][a].

Summary of this case from Willner v. Town of North Hempstead

In MacFawn v. Kresler (supra, 88 N.Y.2d, at 860), we held in a summary judgment context that the dismissal — without prejudice — of the information for insufficiency under CPL 170.30(1)(a) and 170.35(1)(a) could not serve as the basis for a malicious prosecution claim.

Summary of this case from Smith-Hunter v. Harvey

In MacFawn, for example, the Court described a favorable termination as one that "involves the merits and indicates the accused's innocence" (MacFawn v. Kresler, supra, 88 N.Y.2d, at 860).

Summary of this case from Smith-Hunter v. Harvey
Case details for

MacFawn v. Kresler

Case Details

Full title:JAMES MacFAWN, JR., Appellant, v. KERI A. KRESLER et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 2, 1996

Citations

88 N.Y.2d 859 (N.Y. 1996)
644 N.Y.S.2d 486
666 N.E.2d 1359

Citing Cases

Smith-Hunter v. Harvey

Mercy, it is reasoned, would not be appropriate if the prosecution were groundless; rather, mercy "implies a…

Cornell v. Kapral

"Under New York law, the plaintiff in a malicious prosecution claim bears the burden of establishing that the…

109 Citing Cases